Rhine toll

Engers: Grauer Turm, the rest of the customs fortress

Rhein duties were in the entire navigable area of the Rhine from the early Middle Ages brought up in the 1830s to trade by water transport. Taxes for transport on the Rhine and other German rivers can already be proven in the time of the Merovingians . In an edict of 615 by Chlothar II , costs for transport on rivers, landings, pulling services and the use of a port are also dealt with. The Carolingians also issued decrees regulating shipping and river tariffs.

Individual customs posts on the Rhine can be documented from the middle of the 8th century. The tariff was initially to improve the transport by boat on the Rhine, thereby facilitating trade in goods a fee. Due to whirlpools as well as sand and rock banks, the conditions on the Rhine were unfavorable in places for landing and loading and unloading was severely hindered. With the money coming from customs, these conditions should be improved. However, the Carolingians already regarded customs as a trade tax, which also affected the Rhine tariff .

By the end of the 12th century at the latest, however, customs had largely developed from a tax to a fee and an important financial source for the empire and the local rulers on the Rhine, which made the transport of goods more expensive. A remainder of the original fee can still be seen in a document from 1276. After this, the customs officers at Binger Loch still had to help the boatmen with reloading the freight.

Typical goods that were transported up the Rhine by ship were wine, fish from the Netherlands (mainly herrings, plaice and stockfish), spices (e.g. spices), salt and coal. Colonial goods were added later in modern times . Grain and livestock were hardly transported up and down the Rhine, as most of the transport was overland. However, customs duties were also frequently levied there. Down the Rhine, wine, ores, metal goods, stones and slates were among the most frequently transported goods.

Historical navigation on the Rhine

Woensam: 1531 Oberländer (river boats) off Cologne

Even the Romans transported goods on the Rhine with ships and also with rafts . From the time of the Carolingians on, there were more reports of ship transport on the Rhine. Before the start of a planned regulation of the Rhine from around the middle of the 19th century, there was no continuous fairway and numerous sandbanks and shallows as well as rock banks in the area of ​​the Middle Rhine impeded and made shipping traffic difficult. Shipping on the Rhine was divided into two sections. The lower area from Cologne to the North Sea was the Lower Rhine shipping and the section from Cologne up the Rhine was the Upper Rhine shipping.

Due to the conditions on the Rhine, larger bulky ships, coasters and small seagoing vessels were able to navigate the river from the North Sea to Cologne. Up the Rhine from Cologne towards the Middle and Upper Rhine, flat and smaller ships were required. The possible loading volume of the ships was normally a maximum of 50 t and a ratio of 2 to 1 (2 = downstream, 1 = upstream). Only the Dutch were able to use flat-bottomed ships up to around 80 t in their current areas.

The shipping between Bacharach and Bingen on the Middle Rhine was particularly problematic . Since rock banks in the river obstructed the ships, the transport had to be reloaded onto even smaller ships in this area. Before the Rhine was regulated from the middle of the 19th century, from the branching of the Rhine to Waal and Lek, the former was the main direction of traffic to the North Sea; in the years after that, however, the Lek was predominantly used.

The transport was carried out down the Rhine with the help of the current and the larger ships were steered by fixed rudders . Upstream of the Rhine against the current, it was possible to use sails in the Dutch area; from Kleve , for example, movement could only be achieved by towing . For towing, the flat-bottomed boats had a towing mast to which a pulling rope was attached. Smaller boats could be pulled up the Rhine by people, larger ones only with up to eight horses. For towing, towpaths existed on the bank that were located on the left bank of the Rhine in Roman times. From the Middle Ages, towpaths were also laid on the right bank of the Rhine.

The goods were packed in sacks and barrels for shipping. While barrels filled with wine or other liquids were not allowed to be rolled (to avoid leaks), this was common for barrels with solid goods. Dock basins were very rarely available for loading and unloading. Where the arms of the old Rhine or estuaries made it possible for ships to dock inland, these indentations were also used in winter as safety harbors to protect against ice on the Rhine. For loading and unloading, the ships usually hit the bank with their flat bows. Loading and unloading was then carried out using boards placed between the land and the bow of the ship. Mobile ship cranes or fixed tower cranes were required on steep banks or quays , which were available at the larger Rhine ports from the end of the Middle Ages.

Customs during the Middle Ages

Note →

As early as the Romans, in the area on the left bank of the Rhine, in addition to customs duties at the borders, they also levied taxes on transit traffic and goods in markets. These tariffs were continued by the Franks in the time of the Merovingians and Carolingians and the subsequent High Middle Ages in Eastern Franconia . In the area of ​​the Rhine, after the end of Roman rule until around 700, no transport and trade tariffs can be verified, since transport on the Rhine was probably only of subordinate importance at this time. From the 8th century on, there was an increasing number of reports on transit tariffs, which also concerned transport on rivers, even if the name was less the Rhine and the Loire, Seine and Maas.

Düsseldorf, Kaiserswerth, old customs house

The first written evidence for customs posts on the Rhine comes from the early Middle Ages. In 763 Pippin the Younger exempted the Strasbourg church from customs duties on the Rhine, and in 775 this exemption was confirmed by Charlemagne . The only exception to the exemption was the customs post in Dorestad , which was in the area where the Rhine and Lek branched off. Another early duty exemption for ship transport on the Rhine dates from 858. Ludwig the German granted the older Lorch monastery a duty exemption with a certificate .

With regard to the legality, legitimation of tariff collection points and limitation of tariffs and tariffs, verifiable edicts were issued in 614 by Chlothar II and after 800 by Charlemagne and in 821 by a capitular of King Ludwig the Pious . This chapter contained extensive specifications for all types of tariffs and listed both legal and illegal transit tariffs in the first chapter. At that time, the transit tariffs also clearly meant the Rhine tariffs.

Up to the High Middle Ages, almost no data is available on the level of customs duties and the type of goods that were subject to duties. Since until the beginning of the High Middle Ages there was neither a uniform coinage nor an adequate supply of minted coins across the board, customs were settled both in kind and in coins. Only from the reign of Emperor Otto III. from 983 the minting activity of coins again reached an extent that more and more made it possible to pay with coins for the settlement of customs duties instead of in kind. However, taxes in kind continued to be levied to a lesser extent throughout the Middle Ages. This mostly concerned smaller amounts of wine, grain and fish that were needed to supply the customs stations.

The level of customs duties and the type of natural produce were not uniform, especially up to the 11th century, but fluctuated with regard to the port of departure and destination for the cargo. Merchants from the area of ​​the lower Meuse , Cologne, Lower Rhine and Moselle had to pay different tariffs. Depending on the season, the duty rates could be different. Typical natural products were wine, fish (e.g. salmon, herring and eel), cheese, hides and wax. Most of the coins were paid for in denarii or Cologne coins and the goods in kind were converted into coin values. Typical for wine, for example, is the comparison value to the coin of a denarius, the "denariada vini". A denarius wine was dependent on both volume and quality. By the end of the 11th century, the valuations for payments in coins and payments in kind had largely aligned. However, payment in coins was still significantly cheaper than payment in kind and the amount of the customs duties fluctuated depending on the place of origin of the goods and the merchants.

If customs were originally levied depending on the means of transport, this practice changed in the 12th century. So far, only different tariff rates were common for transport by ships, wagons, carts, horses and donkeys. Now, goods-related volume tariffs have been introduced, replacing the flat-rate taxation practice. There is various evidence of the amount of these duties. For example, in Schmithausen in 1319 the tariff for wine was four denarii per barrel plus a flat rate of three denarii "pre-tariff" for the ship, the latter regardless of the size of the ship.

At the beginning of the 13th century the "place of origin" was changed to "area of ​​origin", which resulted in a significant simplification of the tariff calculation. In addition to the graduation of the ship sizes, registers for the market taxes became common, which also made it easier to determine the customs duties.

One innovation at the beginning of the 14th century was the calculation of the tariff for wine according to the so-called tariff , a fictitious unit of measurement. The volume of this fudder fluctuated from ten to twelve ohms from customs to customs . Another innovation was the conversion of coins from denarii or Cologne coins to the Groschen of Tours, the so-called Turnosen . The Turnose was a silver coin with a fineness of 4.22 g silver and was now widely accepted as a customs coin.

Development of tariffs

Loreley River Narrow (1840)

Customs stations on the Rhine were often set up in places with unfavorable conditions for the transport of goods by ship. Typical examples of this were the early customs posts in Bingen - Binger Loch -, Kaub - Felsen im Strom -, Bacharach - strong whirlpools - and St. Goar - sandbanks in the river.

Permission to set up a customs post was reserved for the German kings and emperors , who either initially operated it as the empire's customs post or gave vassals or church institutions as fiefs for a period of time . In some cases, when such an imperial fief was awarded, it was stipulated that a certain portion of the collected tariffs had to be paid to the empire. Occasionally, income from a customs post that already belonged to another person entitled to customs duties was awarded twice. For example, Philipp von Isenburg received from Emperor Charles IV in 1362 the right to collect tournaments at the Andernach customs office until a total of 3000 guilders was reached. Since the customs post belonged to Erzköln , the Isenburg man had to coordinate the collection of his tariff with Archbishop Wilhelm von Gennep .

From the money raised by the customs, partial amounts were often paid as a pension or reward to deserving vassals of the empire or the local noble houses. Especially in the High Middle Ages , church institutions were exempted from customs duties by the emperor. For example, confirmed King Henry VII. The Abbey Altenberg 1225 that it to the customs-houses Boppard and Kaiserswerth had to stay inches.

With the development of customs duties as a source of finance for the empire, the number of customs posts rose sharply. At the end of the 12th century there were already 19 customs posts, at the end of the 13th century 44 and by the end of the 14th century even 62 customs posts. In addition to the Rhenish archbishops, the counts, whose territories lay in the area of ​​the Rhine, also strove for an elevation of Rhine tariffs. While the archbishops of Trier (1018) and Cologne (1138) had customs rights on the Rhine early on, the archbishops of Mainz received this right for the first time in 1298 under Gerhard II von Eppstein .

Since the emperors and kings lost power in the High Middle Ages, new customs rights could no longer be granted at will. After objections from the local rulers, whose counties were in the area of ​​the Rhine, for example, Emperor Friedrich II had to revoke a new Rhine tariff in 1220, which he had already approved for the Count of Geldern . The provisions of the Golden Bull of 1356 mainly concerned the regulations for the election of a new king or emperor and the seven electors who were entitled to vote . In addition, it was confirmed to the electors that, in addition to the right to mint coins , jurisdiction and the Jewish shelf, they also had the customs shelf for their area. Although the emperor could at least formally overrule the electors and had to confirm the tariffs, their right to have a say was thus enshrined.

With the emergence of peace in the country , which from the 13th century onwards was intended to improve legal security both locally and for the entire empire without violence and feuds, no longer-term improvement in the customs situation was achieved in terms of the amount of duty and the number of customs posts.

In 1201 King Philip forbade all “improper customs duties”. In 1235, Emperor Friedrich II issued the Treaty of Mainz in order to u. a. to modify customs. In particular, the customs not legitimized by the Reich should be abolished and the tariffs raised should be checked. In the event of non-compliance, severe penalties, such as being convicted as a mugger, were threatened. The customs offices in Rheinberg , Andernach and St. Goar were closed for a short time . Another unsuccessful attempt to reduce the number of customs posts was made by King Richard in 1269 during the interregnum .

Since the amount of money inevitably fueled the desire of the local rulers, there were numerous feuds and wars over the individual customs posts over the centuries . In the event of financial bottlenecks, the customs offices were often mortgaged and the customs revenue was temporarily transferred to the pledger. The liquidation and repayment of the pledge could lead to serious disputes and quarrels. Since the merchants complained about excessive tariffs, there were sometimes armed conflicts between the cities and the local customs officers.

Rheinfels castle ruins

In the middle of the 13th century, the tariffs were so high that in 1254, at the instigation of Mainz and Worms, 59 cities founded a Rhenish city federation because of the hindrance to trade in order to achieve the abolition or reduction of various Rhine tariffs . Both the Archbishop of Mainz and the Archbishop of Cologne joined this union in the autumn of the same year. In 1255 the Archbishop of Trier, Count Palatine Ludwig II and Count Dieter V. von Katzenelnbogen followed . In contrast to the Lower Rhine, all the important owners of Rheinzöllen on the Middle Rhine were members of the Rhenish Association of Cities.

Despite the opposition of some princes, this covenant was confirmed by King William of Holland . Mercenaries of the federal government destroyed many of the castles of robber barons on the Rhine, who had illegally extorted customs duties from the boatmen. Some legal customs posts were also conquered. For example, Rheinfels Castle was besieged from 1255 by mercenaries of the Rhine Confederation because the customs at the St. Goar customs post had been excessively increased. The siege was called off after a year and a half without result. A general and permanent improvement in the customs situation was not achieved.

Almost four years after the founding of the city union in 1257, the customs situation was again completely unsatisfactory and the city union practically had no influence. At the Diet of Worms in 1268, the League of Cities was reactivated. By 1271 it was now possible to inactivate almost all customs stations between Strasbourg and Cologne for a short time.

An attempt to reduce the number of customs stations on the Rhine, which was successful for a short time, was made by King Albrecht I of Habsburg . In 1301 he ordered the closure of many customs posts on the Lower and Middle Rhine. Only the Rhine tariffs approved by Emperor Friedrich II could continue to be levied. With the support of the imperial cities on the Rhine and especially the Count of Kleve , Albrecht managed to have the three Rhenish archbishops largely stop collecting tariffs. Of the eight customs posts active up to 1301, only the Archbishop of Cologne, who owned five customs posts, was able to collect the Rhine toll in Neuss. The archbishops of Mainz and Trier had to close their three customs posts. After the king's death in 1308, the archbishops managed to reactivate their closed customs posts.

As early as June 1317, under King Ludwig IV. In Bacharach , a new land peace for seven years was agreed with the holders of customs titles and the imperial cities on the Middle Rhine as well as Aachen , Frankfurt , Friedberg , Gelnhausen and Wetzlar . In the area from Hördt , which was south of Germersheim , to Cologne, all tariffs on land and water were to be lifted. Only the old low tariffs on St. Goar, Geisenheim and Boppard were excluded . Otherwise, only one common tariff should be allowed in this area for all allies. This tariff was set at thirty-three turnos per load of wine, eighteen turnos groschen per hundred malter grain, and thirty turnos groschen per hundred hats of salt. King and allied princes received two thirds of the tariff revenue and the cities the remaining third. The Archbishop of Cologne received, if he acceded to the alliance, six turns for every twenty-two turns from the royal-princely share. If he refused to join the land peace, he should not receive a share and be forced to suspend his tariffs. In July 1317 the Archbishop of Cologne joined the alliance.

In the peace of Bacharach in 1317, the cities in Alsace achieved that the Margraves Rudolf IV and Friedrich II of Baden lifted their new Rhine tolls on the Upper Rhine. In compensation for the Upper Rhine area, only one shilling duty could be levied for each load of wine or goods of a comparable value .

In the second half of the 14th century, under King Wenceslaus , another attempt was made to improve the customs system. In 1379 he briefly revoked all Rhine tolls between Andernach and Rees .

With the beginning of the 14th century and the dwindling power of the emperors, the Rhine tariffs of the empire were pledged more and more and could no longer be redeemed due to lack of money. The beneficiaries were the prince electors on the Rhine, who had paid the pledge at the time or took it over from other pledges and were now the masters of the relevant customs posts in the long term.

The extensive takeover of the Rhine tariffs by the Rhenish electors did not lead to a general reduction in tariffs. A reduction of the tariffs in the area of ​​the Upper Rhine could reach the Free Imperial City of Strasbourg in 1351 . By blocking the river with chains and tree trunks, all shipping traffic on the Rhine in the area of ​​the city was cut off. This caused the princes to repeal all new tariffs that had been levied in the meantime and only to continue to collect the old tariffs approved by the empire. Permanent control by the Rhenish Association of Cities was prevented. In 1381 princes, counts and knights made a covenant against the cities. Armed conflicts followed, in 1388 the mercenaries of the towns near Weil and Worms were defeated and the towns' influence on the Rhine toll was ended.

At the beginning of the 15th century, the Rhine toll continued to be a heavy burden for trade and shipping on the Rhine. The customs costs were at times so high that the merchants tried to bypass the Rhine by land transport. This led to countermeasures in 1408. The electors, whose customs posts were on the Middle Rhine, agreed "new military tariffs" for land transport. In doing so, they tried to prevent the goods being transported overland and the customs duties at Ehrenfels , Bacharach, Kaub, Boppard and Oberlahnstein from being circumvented. The electors now held regular meetings, so-called Kurvereine , to agree on uniform conditions for the transport of goods and customs duties. This should also improve order and security for the transport of goods on the Rhine. This Kurverein met for the first time in 1354 and consisted of the Archbishops of Mainz, Trier and Cologne, later the Electoral Palatinate also belonged to it.

The Kurverein met regularly. While the agreements in the 15th and 16th centuries mainly concerned the safeguarding of the Rhine tolls, in the 17th and 18th centuries they also contained specifications for transport, the condition of the towpaths and regulations for the provision of winter harbors for ships and for loading - and unloading of the goods necessary cranes in the ports.

Düsseldorf-Wittlaer, former towpath with a myriameter stone

Despite occasional attempts to reduce the number of customs posts and lower tariffs, the burden on the transport of goods on the Rhine remained high over the centuries. In the middle of the 15th century, the share of customs between Bingen and Koblenz was around 66% of the value of goods.

After the Kurverein had agreed to a special tariff for the city of Cologne at the Nuremberg Reichstag in 1491 until June 1494, an attempt was made to relieve the Rhine trade. The three Rhenish archbishops with the Elector of the Rhine Palatinate did not want to agree to any new Rhine tariffs in the future, tariff increases were to be prevented and the previous tariff rates lowered. Circumventing these requirements by switching to land transport was also prohibited.

The Rhine tariffs were not the only barrier to trade, as the handling and stacking rights in some ports also hindered and made transport more expensive. Cologne and Mainz in particular had a strong influence on transport on the Lower and Middle Rhine until the 1830s and hindered the development of other Rhine ports. The Cologne stacking law in particular helped Cologne merchants to gain a special position in ship transport on the Rhine and the city of Cologne to generate significant income over the centuries.

The beginnings of the Cologne stacking right can be documented in the second half of the 12th century. The stacking right was favored by the conditions on the Rhine. For the ship transport between the North Sea or Lower Rhine and the Middle Rhine, these required reloading of the freight from the larger Dutch ship types to the smaller " Oberländer ". At the beginning of the 13th century, it was possible to prove that Flemish merchants received financial benefits if they were reloaded in Cologne and the goods were offered for sale. In a decree of Archbishop Konrad von Hochstaden of May 7, 1259, the Cologne stacking right and thus reloading in Cologne was prescribed for shipping.

The exemption of religious institutions from customs duties, which was already customary for the emperors in the High Middle Ages, was also retained by the later local electors. In addition to abbeys and monasteries that were exempt from customs duties on wine, this also affected individual high-ranking personalities and the goods for the regional electors and prince-bishops.

Customs facilities on the Rhine

At the beginning of the High Middle Ages, the first Rhine tolls and the names of those who were enfeoffed with them can be documented. One of the oldest customs posts on the Rhine is the one in Koblenz; it was first mentioned in a document in 1018: Emperor Heinrich II gave the Archbishop of Trier a Rhine toll in Koblenz. There was already a customs post in Schmithausen on the Lower Rhine before 1085, and in 1085 it was transferred from the “Chapter St. Johann in Utrecht” to the “Marienstift in Utrecht”. Further customs stations on the Rhine were in Angeren , Hammerstein and Boppard in the 11th century .

To secure the customs posts, the customs takers erected permanent buildings and castles near the shore. Examples for this are:

• Ehrenfels Castle was built in 1210 for the Rhine toll in the area of ​​Bingen .
• Fürstenberg Castle in Rheindiebach followed in 1243 , at that time a Kölsch fiefdom.
• 1245 was by Count Diether III. of Katzenelnbogen the Rheinfels castle built around 1270 confirm Emperor Frederick II. These Rhine toll to St. Goar.
• From 1326, the Pfalzgrafenstein Castle was built near the village of Kaub on an island in the Rhine , also called "Pfalz bei Kaub", one of the most famous fortress buildings for customs from that time.

The system of customs posts existed until the beginning of the 19th century. With the conquest of the left Rhine regions by France from 1794 at the beginning of the coalition wars , the decline of the Rhine toll began.

Customs houses of the various dynasties

Due to the money that could be obtained with the Rhine toll, all dioceses and counties along the Rhine strived to own and maintain several customs posts as far as possible. To protect their customs privileges, the archbishops of Cologne, Mainz and Trier joined forces, and later the princes of the Electoral Palatinate also took part in these alliances known as Kurvereine . A forerunner of these Kurvereine was an alliance of 1339, which was agreed for ten years between the archbishops and concerned the protection of the transport of goods on the roads and the Rhine between Oppenheim and Rheinberg. Increased and new road and Rhine tolls were to be prevented and the construction of new robber castles prevented.

The pledging of the Rhine tariffs and their later redemption could lead to more serious conflicts. An example of this is the Battle of Kleverhamm in 1397. This war was triggered by a pension from customs at Kaiserswerth. This customs had been bought in 1358 by Count Gerhard von Jülich-Berg . His son, Count Wilhelm II von Jülich-Berg , had pledged the customs again in 1368, but agreed an annual pension of 2,400 guilders from the customs revenue for the dual county of Jülich-Berg . Who was entitled to this pension was disputed after a few years, as the noble houses of Kleve and von der Mark also claimed this pension as an inheritance. Since a peaceful agreement could not be reached, a war broke out between "Jülich-Berg" and "Kleve-Mark" in 1397, which the latter won.

The most important dioceses and dynasties with their customs posts on the Middle and Lower Rhine are described below. Customs stations on the Upper Rhine are listed in a further chapter.

Kurmainz

Ehrenfels

Like the Archbishops of Trier and Cologne, the Archbishops of Mainz strove for customs law on the Rhine as early as the High Middle Ages. The collection of market tariffs can be documented before the end of the first millennium, but this is not possible for a Rhine tariff before the end of the 13th century. The first tariff exemptions by the archbishops, which presumably related to a Rhine toll, date back to 1250, but cannot be clearly assigned to a customs post approved by the Reich. At that time, the Mainz team intensified their efforts to acquire a Rhine toll, but Archbishop Werner von Eppstein was unsuccessful around 1270. It was not until his successor, Archbishop Gerhard II von Eppstein , that he succeeded briefly in 1298 in acquiring the Rhine toll at Boppard at the expense of the Counts of Katzenelnbogen.

• Mainz : Here a port tariff is documented as early as 1155, Archbishop Arnold von Selenhofen reduced the tariff in the port of Mainz for Duisburg merchants. It was not until 1325 that King Ludwig the Bavarian allowed the Archbishop of Mainz to levy a Rhine toll in Mainz, which can be proven in a document. This customs post was temporarily moved to Oppenheim .
• Ehrenfels Castle : This customs post was probably set up by King Albrecht I between 1302 and 1307 in order to pay off his debts to the Archbishop of Mainz from the customs revenue. When Albrecht died in 1308, the debt had not yet been paid off. As early as 1310, the customs post was pledged to the Archbishops of Mainz, who thereby had a second Rhine toll in the Middle Rhine area in addition to the customs post in Oberlahnstein. Even Henry VII. Had been funded at his coronation as emperor in 1312 by the archbishop of Mainz, then the sum of the debt that further delayed. For the election of Charles IV. In 1346, the Archbishop of Mainz had again granted a further pledge of 5,000 marks, which had to be repaid through customs duties. As a result, the customs office came into the permanent possession of the Kurmainzer.
• Oberlahnstein : The customs post was approved by King Charles IV of Kurmainz in 1376. The place at the mouth of the Lahn was in a small Kurmainzer enclave, which had belonged to Mainz as an imperial fief since 1220. Since Lahneck Castle , built to secure the enclave, was not on the Rhine, it was unsuitable as a customs castle . The Martinsburg , which Kurmainz already used for his customs rights acquired in Boppard in 1298 under Archbishop Gerhard II von Eppstein , which had been moved to Oberlahnstein in 1300, served as the customs post. The Martinsburg was built from 1298 to secure the customs post directly on the Rhine.
• Niederheimbach : In 1369, the Mainz Cathedral Chapter received permission from King Charles IV to levy a Rhine toll of two and a half turnoses. At the request of the Archbishop of Mainz, however, this customs was moved to the Oberlahnstein customs station and no new customs station was opened in Niederheimbach.

Electoral Palatinate

Customs castle Kaub

It was not until the beginning of the 13th century that the Wittelsbachers succeeded in uniting the areas of the Electoral Palatinate in the area of ​​the Rhine with the office of the Count Palatine. The count palatine were originally officials and representatives of the king or emperor and not only associated with the Rhine Palatinate; there was one count palatine for each duchy. Only after the unification of the Electoral Palatinate area did the Electoral Palatinate buy customs posts for the Rhine toll. Important territories of the counts and later electors of the Palatinate were on the Rhine between Basel and the Moselle. Smaller areas on the Nahe were part of it. The customs posts were originally set up by the empire and came to the Palatinate people through other previous owners in the High Middle Ages. The customs posts of the Electoral Palatinate, which were operated for a longer period of time, were on the Middle Rhine in Bacharach and Kaub and south of Mainz on the Upper Rhine in Oppenheim, Selz , Germersheim , Mannheim and Neuburg on the Rhine .

• Rheindiebach had belonged to the Archbishop of Cologne since the middle of the 11th century. A Rhine toll was first detectable here in 1243. Fürstenberg Castle was built in 1219 to secure the area and the customs post . To secure the Rhine toll, an additional watch tower was built between the Rhine and the castle. The castle with the associated area including the Rhine toll was given to the Electoral Palatinate as a fief of the archbishop in 1243 and was finally acquired in 1410 by purchase.
• Kaub : The customs post was acquired in 1277 by Count Palatine Ludwig II by purchasing the village of Kaub with Gutenfels Castle from the Lords of Falkenstein . The Rhine toll of the Falkensteiners is first documented in 1257. At this point in time, Philip I von Falkenstein ordered that the Burgmannen von Kaub exempt the Eberbach monastery from customs duties. Presumably, the customs post was no longer active in 1277, as a Rhine toll was not specified in the purchase contracts. At the beginning of the 14th century, however, the customs post was back in operation. In a document from the end of 1310, both the Rhine toll as well as the castle and town of Kaub were pledged to Count Gerlach von Nassau for one year. Apart from a short interruption between 1317 and 1320, this was the time of the Bacharach Peaceful Peace, the customs post was operated permanently by the Palatinate Rhineland. As early as 1327, a fortified tower was built on a Rhine island off Kaub to secure customs. This tower was then expanded into today's customs fortress Pfalzgrafenstein .
• Bacharach : The area around and with Bacharach was originally an imperial fiefdom of the Archbishops of Cologne. In the 11th century they built Stahleck Castle above Bacharach to secure their property . As bailiffs for the ecclesiastical area of ​​the Archbishops of Cologne on the Middle Rhine, the Count Palatine were able to increasingly take over secular power in the areas of Erzköln. The first Count Palatine from the Wittelsbach family was Ludwig I from 1214 onwards . Under this rule, the imperial customs in Bacharach can be documented for the first time. In 1225 or 1226 Ludwig I exempted the ships of the Eberbach monastery from customs duties. The fiefdom for the customs post then changed hands several times in the 13th century and the collection of customs duties was briefly interrupted around 1234 and 1269.

At the beginning of the 14th century there were several pledges. For example, pledges were a wealthy Jew in 1317 and Archbishop Balduin von Trier in 1322 . He pledged the customs post for 50,000 Heller to Johann von Böhmen . With the permission of the emperor, Count Palatine Ruprecht I redeemed this pledge and the customs post belonged to the Electoral Palatinate, who had meanwhile also taken over the city and area of ​​Bacharach from Kurköln. The Count Palatinate established an important trading and staging area for wine in Bacharach.

Kurtrier

The Archbishops of Trier are among the oldest holders of customs titles in Germany and already had documented customs rights in the 8th century, which were raised in the episcopal city of Trier and the associated immunity area . This largely concerned market tariffs, for which no specific details are known so far. In 947 Archbishop Ruotbert von Trier received a royal customs privilege for trade in the Moselle and Rhine area.

Although the Middle Rhine lay in the eastern border area of ​​Kurtrier, the Archbishops of Trier succeeded in asserting their secular claim to rulership on the Middle Rhine in the area of ​​Koblenz and on the lower Lahn river basin from Limburg.

• Koblenz was an old customs post, in which already at the time of the Ottonen customs duties were levied, which affected the transit traffic on the Moselle and Rhine. For the first time in 1018 a Rhine toll can be documented for Koblenz, which Emperor Heinrich II gave to Archbishop Poppo von Trier . Emperor Heinrich IV freed the Trier Simeonstift from the Koblenz Rhine toll, and from 1042 the archbishop transferred the Rhine toll in Koblenz to the Simeonstift in Trier. In 1182 there was a dispute between the monastery and the city of Koblenz about the income from this duty, which demanded a share. Through the mediation of Archbishop Arnold, this dispute was ended with a one-off payment of 60 marks to the city.

The customs law was the Simeonstift 1195 by Emperor Heinrich VI. confirmed again. In 1309, the Archbishop of Trier took over this most important customs post on the Rhine for the archbishopric, as King Henry VII irrevocably granted him the Rhine toll . In 1328, Prince Bishop Balduin von Trier moved the Koblenz Rhine toll to the Stolzenfels Kurtrier office, where the Rheinburg Stolzenfels took over customs protection. Under Archbishop Werner von Falkenstein , the Rhine toll was temporarily relocated to Engers for a few years from 1412 and Kunostein Castle , which was built by Kurtrier after the conquest of Engers in 1371, was used to secure the customs . The Koblenz customs office lasted until the end of the archbishopric.

Boppard: Electoral castle in the state before 1811

• Boppard was originally an old customs post of the Reich on the Middle Rhine, which was located in the area of ​​a problematic section of the river, as gravel banks in the river made shipping difficult. An imperial tariff was levied here until the beginning of the 14th century. The first documentary evidence of this customs post shows that the later Emperor Heinrich IV. Exempted the citizens of Worms from other customs duties in 1074, as well as from the Rhine toll in Boppard. In 1190 the canons of Worms received an annual pension of 16 Worms pounds from the Rhine toll from Boppard. In 1282, the empire pledged the customs post in Boppard to Count Eberhard I von Katzenelnbogen for 12,000 Cologne dinars, who was in charge of this Rhine toll until at least the end of 1297. From the beginning of 1298 the Archbishop of Mainz, Gerhard II von Eppstein, came to the Boppard customs post at short notice, as he was able to steal the imperial pledge from Katzenelnbogen when the new King Albrecht I of Habsburg was elected through his position as Elector. This newly acquired Rhine toll was transferred to Oberlahnstein by the Archbishop of Mainz as early as 1300.

In 1309 and 1312 King Heinrich VII pledged the city and Rhine toll to his brother, Archbishop Baldwin of Trier . The previous Free Imperial City of Boppard did not agree to the new dependency on the Diocese of Trier and refused to give its consent. Mercenaries from the diocese of Trier therefore besieged the city in 1327 and conquered it. The city was then fortified and the keep was expanded into a customs fortress. In 1496, with the help of King Maximilian I , Boppard was able to revoke the sovereignty of Trier again, but in 1497 the city was recaptured by the Trier family and remained under their sovereignty. The customs post in Boppard existed until the end of the electorate.

• Wesel , later called Oberwesel, was like Boppard a free imperial city. It had an old imperial tariff, which was quoted in two documents from 1253 in which King Wilhelm of Holland issued the Teutonic Order privileges for this customs post. In 1309, the customs post was pledged by Heinrich VII to his brother Baldwin and thus to Kurtrier. The Weselers also fought against the new sovereign and tried to break away from the suzerainty of the archbishopric in the "Wesel War" in 1390/91. However, they were conquered by the Trier family and remained with Kurtrier. There is little information about the Wesel customs post under Trier suzerainty, presumably because of its proximity to Boppard it was only of minor importance, a collection of the Rhine toll in Wesel is no longer verifiable after 1269.

• Leutesdorf across from Andernach was in an area that belonged to the Archdiocese of Mainz from the beginning of the 15th century . This Rhine toll was first awarded by King Henry VII in early 1309 to the Bartholomäus family from Aachen to repay their debts, as the king had received a loan from these Lombards . It was transferred to Fulda Abbey in 1310 for a tariff collection of 5000 pounds Heller. Further money orders from the king can be traced for 1311 and 1313. Around 1314, the Archbishop of Cologne, Heinrich II of Virneburg, achieved an end to the tariff collection in Leutesdorf, as he was allowed to transfer the customs title to Andernach. Under Archbishop Peter von Aspelt , Archmainz tried in vain to maintain the customs post in Leutesdorf around 1309, but this was prevented by the stronger position of the Archbishops of Cologne. For a long time after 1314 there are no longer any traceable customs levies in Leutesdorf. From the Thirty Years' War the re-active customs post on the right bank of the Rhine belonged to Kurmainz. Until the dissolution of the Archdiocese of Trier after 1794 by the French, the customs post was operated at the same time as those in Koblenz and Boppard.

Kurköln

Before the High Middle Ages, the Archdiocese of Cologne had already transferred some Rhine tariffs to fiefs from the respective German emperors. An early duty exemption for the Brauweiler Abbey on the Rhine and Moselle was granted by King Heinrich III. with a document dated 1051. This exemption from duty may also have affected a Rhine tariff that the Archdiocese of Cologne levied at that time. The first verifiable Rhine toll for the archbishopric was that of Esserden near Rees. King Henry IV had transferred this duty in 1062 from Duke Ordulf of Billung to Archbishop Anno II . However, almost no data are known for a survey at this customs post. There is evidence that this customs had already been moved to Schmithausen around 1075 and now belonged to the diocese of Utrecht .

Some early customs posts such as the one near Rheindiebach , which fell to the Electoral Palatinate after 1243 , changed operators early on. At this time, the Archdiocese of Cologne was freed from the Rhine toll at other customs posts in the empire. For example, Emperor Otto IV freed Archbishop Adolf I of Cologne from the new Rhine toll in Kaiserswerth on July 12, 1198. Other Rhine tariffs were temporarily revoked. So in 1301 all Rhine tolls from Bacharach to Rheinberg and Schmithausen were lifted by King Albrecht I. With the exception of Neuss, all customs offices in Erzköln were affected by this closure. This prohibition was withdrawn again in 1310 by the succeeding King Heinrich VII , when he confirmed that Archbishop Wigbold von Holte had enforced the renunciation of the Cologne customs posts Andernach, Bonn and Rheinberg. In addition, Kurköln received compensation of 40,000 marks.

When Emperor Heinrich VII died in 1313, there were disputes about his successor between the Houses of Habsburg and Wittelsbach. The former had Friedrich III. and the latter had Ludwig the Bavarian elected king at the same time in 1314. As a result, the question of abolishing or reducing the Rhine tariffs was also disputed. At the beginning of 1317 Friedrich III. reached a suspension of the Rhine tolls on the Upper Rhine with the Bishop of Strasbourg by the end of the year.

On June 22, 1317, under the leadership of Ludwig the Bavarian, a state peace was concluded with more than ten cities in Bacharach for a period of seven years , which should enable the abolition and reduction of the Rhine tariffs on the Lower and Middle Rhine. In 1318, King Friedrich III demanded that the customs posts in Koblenz, Remagen and Cologne be abolished and that the others, which had already been awarded, be reactivated. From the middle of the 14th century, the customs posts in Rheinberg, Neuss, Bonn and Andernach were hardly disputed. King Wenzel confirmed it to Archbishop Friedrich III. von Saar Werden when he was elected king in 1376.

When the archbishops of Cologne pledged customs, the Cologne cathedral chapter sometimes took on the guarantee. With these guarantees, the cathedral chapter was able to participate in the customs revenue of the customs post. Archbishop Dietrich II von Moers had to raise high financial resources for the Soest feud and the archbishopric was heavily in debt. The Cologne Cathedral Chapter had provided the guarantee to secure these debts. In order not to get into financial difficulties through this guarantee, the cathedral chapter had agreed with the possible successor, the later Archbishop Ruprecht , that he should grant financial relief immediately after his inauguration in order to support his election. After his election in 1463, Ruprecht confirmed the outstanding debt of 25,000 guilders, for which the archbishopric had pledged the Kaiserswerth customs post , and released the cathedral chapter from this. In addition, the archbishop involved the cathedral chapter temporarily in the customs revenue in Zons and Kaiserswerth.

The most important customs posts, which were controlled for a long time by the Archbishops of Cologne, were in Rheinberg / Uerdingen , Kaiserswerth, Neuss / Zons, Bonn and Andernach . In addition, Kurköln had a few other customs posts in Esserden, Rees, Xanten , Cologne, Linz and Remagen of lesser importance, some of which belonged to the Archbishops of Cologne only for a short time. In addition to the archbishopric, others contributed to the revenue from the customs offices, such as the cathedral chapter in Cologne at the end of the 18th century with a share of the customs revenue in Uerdingen. The archbishopric's main customs offices are as follows:

Rheinberg, lower remainder of the customs area

• Rheinberg (also called Berka, Berken or Rheinberk) has been an important customs post for the archbishops since the Middle Ages. It is unclear when the first customs permit was issued. The Rhine toll can be documented for the first time in 1235 under Archbishop Heinrich von Müllenark , who instructed the Kamp monastery to be exempt from land and Rhine tolls (in terra vel reno) in Berka. The next document comes from 1279 under Archbishop Siegfried von Westerburg . The Rhine toll was lifted again in 1293.

The archbishop had the city fortified as early as the end of the 13th century and built a fortification system from 1292 to 1298, the tower of which served as a customs tower and which lay directly on the Rhine until the laying of the Rhine bed at the end of the 17th century. 1314 confirmed King Friedrich III. Archbishop Heinrich II of Virneburg established the customs posts in Andernach, Bonn and Neuss and combined market-related shipping tariffs in Rees, Xanten and Rheinberg to form a transit tariff in Rheinberg. The Rhine toll for these customs posts in Erzköln was no longer in dispute for a long time.

The tariff collection in Rheinberg was frequently interrupted for the archbishops by short-term pledges and, above all, by military occupations and the destruction of the place. At the beginning of the 1370s, Rheinberg's castle, land and Rhine toll were pledged to the County of Kleve. This pledge was redeemed again by Erzköln in 1373 and Count Adolf I von Kleve acknowledged the repayment of the pledge sum of 55,000 gold shields. Loans from the Cologne cathedral chapter to the archbishops were also repaid through the pledging on Rhine tariffs. For example, Archbishop Gebhard von Mansfeld transferred in 1558 for the repayment of 71,000 guilders that his predecessor Adolf III. and Anton had received the Rhine toll to Rheinberg to the cathedral chapter.

War-like interruptions to the tariff collection occurred especially during the religious turmoil and the Dutch struggle for freedom from around the middle of the 16th century. Even after the end of the Thirty Years' War in 1648, Rheinberg was frequently occupied by German, Spanish and French troops. After the end of this warlike phase, the Rhine shifted its course by about 2 km to the northeast and Rheinberg was now well west of the Rhine. The result was that the Cologne customs post in Rheinberg was closed in 1692 and relocated to Uerdingen.

• Uerdingen : The customs post existed until the Archdiocese of Cologne was dissolved after the French occupied the area on the left bank of the Rhine in 1794, from whom it was taken over. For a short time in the 13th century both Uerdingen and Worringen were listed as customs posts for a Rhine toll. As part of a peace treaty between Cologne Archbishop Siegfried von Westerburg , the Duke of Brabant and the Counts of Kleve and Geldern for the areas on the Lower Rhine and the Maas to Dender , the abolition of the customs posts in Worringen, Uerdingen and Rheinberg was agreed for the Lower Rhine in 1279. After the defeat of the Archbishop of Cologne in Worringen in 1288, the Archbishop of Cologne could only reactivate the Rhine toll in Rheinberg from 1314 onwards. Worringen was then no longer verifiable as a customs post, while Uerdingen later replaced Rheinberg.
• Kaiserswerth , on the right bank of the Rhine, was originally a customs post of the empire, which in the High Middle Ages belonged to the Archbishop of Cologne for a long time only after several pledges.
• Neuss : As early as 877, a customs exemption for a customs post in Neuss was granted by King Ludwig the Younger , but this presumably related to a market tariff. The first clear evidence of a Rhine toll comes from 1138. At this time Archbishop Arnold I granted the Bedburg Marienstift an exemption from the customs duty in Neuss. Further verifiable duty exemptions followed by Erzköln in Neuss for monasteries in Kaiserswerth (1145), Meer (1167), Corvey (1181), Liesborn (1186), Cappenberg (1193) and Wesel (1205). At the end of the 12th century, King Adolf von Nassau confirmed to the Archbishop of Cologne the customs post in Neuss, including those in Rheinberk and Bonn, as well as other customs duties on the Lower and Middle Rhine. To secure the customs post, a fort was built in 1255 on the banks of the Rhine near Neuss. In 1364, Archbishop Engelbrecht III agreed . that his predecessor Adolf von Kleve had to be paid a pension of 5,000 gold shields from the customs of Neuss because of his support for the Archbishopric of Cologne.

From the end of the 13th century, the disagreements between Kurköln and the city of Neuss increased, as the latter wanted to reduce the influence of the archbishops on the city. Immediately after his election as archbishop in November 1370, Friedrich III. von Saar moved the customs post for the Rhine toll to the small farming community of Zons upstream. The archbishops of Cologne had already received the necessary permission from Emperor Charles IV in 1355 . This relocation was carried out in August 1372.

Zons: Rhine gate with customs tower in the background

• Zons : After the opening of the customs post, the Friedestrom customs castle was laid out in 1373 and fortified with the village. In addition to securing the customs post, the fortifications were also important for securing the secular claim to rule over the areas of the Archdiocese of Cologne on the Lower Rhine on the left bank of the Rhine. Around 1450 the customs post was pledged to the Cologne Cathedral Chapter by Archbishop Dietrich II of Moers after the Soest feud due to excessive indebtedness of Kurköln. Until the end of Kurköln, this part of the income from the customs post was made.

The customs post was severely affected by the chaos of war during the Reformation, the Dutch struggle for freedom and the various wars on the Lower Rhine, some with French participation. The income from customs, which was important and profitable for the archbishop, was therefore often lost for years. With the takeover of the areas on the left bank of the Rhine from 1794 by the French and the secularization of the archbishopric, this customs post for the Cologne archbishop ended.

• Cologne : One of the most important trading places on the Rhine since the time of the Romans was the city of Cologne, which belonged to the sphere of influence of the Cologne archbishops even before the beginning of the High Middle Ages. However, disputes over power in Cologne began early on between the archbishop and the city. The main opponents of the archbishop were the merchants, who largely controlled the Rhine trade via the Cologne port. This control was strengthened from the middle of the 12th century through loading and stacking rights. A transit tariff for ship transport on the Rhine should therefore not have been an advantage for trade reasons. A Rhine toll is therefore not verifiable for Cologne at the beginning of the High Middle Ages.

After the Battle of Worringen in 1288, the citizens of Cologne ousted the Archbishop of Cologne and the latter moved his official seat to Bonn. A customs post for the Rhine toll in Cologne can only be proven from 1362/63. Archbishop Dietrich II von Moers transferred the customs rights to the city in 1416 by pledging them.

• Bonn : This customs post was illegally set up for the first time by the Archbishop of Cologne, Konrad von Hochstaden, around 1250, as he was not authorized to do so by the King. The customs post was first legitimized when King Adolf von Nassau granted this customs duty for 15 years in 1293. The permit was part of the reimbursement of the election and coronation costs, which Archbishop Siegfried of Cologne had assumed for King Adolf at the time. In a document from 1299, Archbishop Wigbold von Holte transferred the noble lord Walram von Montjoie a pension of 200 marks per year from the Rhine toll of Bonn. In 1308, Archbishop Heinrich II received permission from King Heinrich VII to operate the customs post in Bonn again for four years, as it had to be closed at the beginning of the 14th century.

In 1345, the curb bishop Walram von Jülich took out a loan to the customs office for 36,000 marks. The loan was provided by three knights, including Werner von Spiegel . For the repayment, the knights were given nine tournoses from the customs of Bonn.

At the end of 1414, King Sigismund brokered a comparison between the city of Cologne and Dietrich II von Moers , newly elected for the office of archbishop , who had not yet been ordained bishop at the time. For the comparison, 30,000 guilders were paid to the king, which were to be refinanced from customs at the customs office in Bonn. 5000 guilders of this had to be repaid to the archbishop when he took office.

In 1432 Archbishop Dietrich II agreed with Johann II von Loon-Heinsberg a payment of 500 guilders from the customs revenue in return for the Electoral Cologne fief that Johann II had offered the Archbishop for Rheidt , Oberkassel , Sieglar and Rodenkirchen .

The old customs bastion, built in the middle of the 17th century, is a relic of the fortifications that were built to secure customs and the city. The customs post in Bonn, along with Uerdingen, Zons and Andernach, belonged to the archbishopric's customs posts, which were actively operated until the beginning of the French era in 1794.

• Andernach : The free imperial city of Andernach was granted the right to a customs post early on, first indications date back to 1147, when the Egmond monastery was granted customs exemption in Neuss, Cologne and Andernach by the Archbishop of Cologne. A market or Rhine toll approved by the emperor can only be documented from 1167, when Emperor Friedrich I gave Archbishop Reinald von Dassel the glory and the imperial court of Andernach, including the right to coins and customs, for his support in the war at Tusculum against the Romans.

Towards the end of the 12th century, the customs post was presumably once again an imperial tariff, as Cologne's jurisdiction can only be proven from 1197. It is controversial whether a Rhine tariff was levied in the 12th and 13th centuries or whether these were always market tariffs. Only from September 1, 1310 onwards can a clear imperial law claim to a Rhine toll be proven. In 1362, Emperor Charles IV granted Philipp von Isenberg 3,000 guilders from the Rhine toll of Andernach. The Isenberger had to clarify the details for the payment of the amount with the Archbishop of Cologne, the owner of the customs office. Under Archbishop Engelbert III. the customs post was relocated to Linz on the other side of the Rhine in 1365.

• Linz : With Linz, the archbishopric also received a customs post on the right bank of the Rhine, which remained there for over 100 years. In 1475 the customs were ordered by Emperor Friedrich III. relocated to Andernach again. This instruction was given out of gratitude, as the city had supported the emperor in the Burgundian War despite severe losses. Despite the relocation to Andernach, an additional Rhine toll was levied by the Archbishop of Cologne in Linz after 1475. In 1482 this additional customs post was opened by Emperor Friedrich III. confirmed to the Archbishop of Cologne, Hermann von Hessen, for permanent tariff collection. When Archbishop Adolf von Schaumburg took over his office in the Archbishopric of Cologne in 1547, the Archbishopric was heavily in debt and Adolf was forced to take out loans that were repaid with the income from the Cologne Rhine tolls. The revenue from the Rhine toll from Linz was also used for this purpose. In 1548 the archbishop received a loan of 400 guilders from the scholaster Johan Walschem, who worked in the parish of the St. Apostle Church in Cologne.

County or Duchy of Jülich

Only a few and smaller areas of this county and the later Duchy of Jülich were on the Rhine. The counts and dukes of Jülichgau therefore did not have their own customs posts on the Rhine in the High Middle Ages. However, after 1300 the Jülich counts obtained from King Albrecht I a share in the customs revenue of the Kaiserswerth customs office for a short time because they had supported him in a dispute with the Archbishop of Cologne. In addition, in 1302 the king gave Count Gerhard V von Jülich permission to levy a Rhine toll in Rheineck . If there were any difficulties, because Rheineck Castle belonged to the Archdiocese of Cologne, the customs post could either be relocated to Breisig or Kaiserswerth (incorrectly spelled “Keyserswinter”). Since the Reichsburg in Kaiserswerth was controlled by the Jülichern in 1302, customs should have been levied there. As a further thank you, Gerhard V received permission from King Albrecht I in 1306 to raise a Rhine toll of six turnoses in Hammerstein for three years from August 1st .

In 1321, the Jülich family were awarded additional customs income in an arbitration award. Gerhard V. von Jülich was supposed to hand over the Kurkölner city of Zülpich , which was warlike occupied by the Jülichern, back to the Archbishopric and Archbishop Heinrich II had to pledge the customs post in Bonn. The deposit amount should be paid from the customs revenue from the Bonn Rhine toll. In the middle of 1398, Duke Wilhelm von Jülich-Geldern received permission from King Wenzel to set up a Rhine tariff over six turnoses in Wesseling, with the tariff being divided between the king and the duke. The customs post was no longer operational, as King Ruprecht, at the beginning of January 1401, at the pressure of the Rhenish electors, revoked all of the customs posts on the Rhine that had not yet been assigned by King Wenzel and had not yet been established.

Later, through the personal union with the noble houses von Berg, von Kleve and von der Pfalz , the Jülich were automatically indirectly involved in their customs posts.

County or Duchy of Berg

Düsseldorf customs gate around 1500

The beginning of a customs post for the Rhine toll in Duisburg cannot be precisely proven. The first information on customs duties in the Duisburg area is given in the transfer of a “Duisburg court” to Archbishop Adalbert von Bremen in 1065 by King Heinrich IV . This concerned a market tariff, probably a fair tariff, and not yet a Rhine tariff. Presumably, a permanent tariff was levied from around the middle of the 12th century, which also affected a Rhine tariff, which was confirmed by Emperor Friedrich I in 1184 . This Rhine toll levied in the south of Duisburg is listed in a document from Count Rainald I von Geldern in 1279 , in which the Count confirms that Duisburgers are exempt from duty at the customs post in the "Forest near Duisburg". A little later this duty was passed on from the Counts of Geldern to the Counts of Kleve.

Through the marriage of Count Adolf VI. von Berg with Agnes von Kleve at the beginning of the 14th century came the customs post from the Klevern to the noble house of Berg . However, the customs post was south of Duisburg in the area of ​​the later fortified house Angerort and thus directly on the northern border of the county of Berg . As early as 1324, the Counts of Berg were granted permission for the first time by imperial authorization to transfer this Rhine toll to Düsseldorf . Although Emperor Ludwig IV. Granted the Rhine toll with the relocation to Duesseldorf to Count Adolf VI. von Berg confirmed again in 1344, Kurköln continued to raise objections and was able to delay the relocation until the last quarter of the 14th century. In addition, Emperor Ludwig IV issued this Duisburg customs back to the Klever in 1347 and again to the Berger in 1349 with a subsequent confirmation. The latter was necessary because Count Gerhard von Jülich-Berg had begun in 1348 to raise this Duisburg customs law in Kaiserswerth. This Rhine toll privilege was used by the Berger until 1368.

In 1377, Count Wilhelm II. Von Berg relocated the Duisburg customs to Düsseldorf with the renewed approval of Emperor Charles IV . Initially, customs were raised in a watchtower on Krämerstrasse and moved to Zollstrasse in 1556 . In 1380, the Count of King Wenzel, who was now elevated to Duke Wilhelm I von Berg, received permission to open another customs post in Breisig . There is almost no further information about this customs post, as it probably only existed for a short time. However, in view of the “particularly good relationship” between the Berger and the Essen monastery and its possessions in Breisig , the duke released the monastery from this duty in a document in 1380.

After the customs post was relocated to Düsseldorf in 1377, King Wenzel confirmed this Rhine toll of six turnoses for Duke Wilhelm I von Berg in 1380. The Archbishop of Cologne tried unchanged to prevent the customs post in Düsseldorf. It was only when Duke Wilhelm agreed to the bishop and the city of Cologne in 1386 that the tariffs would be reduced by a third that the resistance decreased. However, after 1386 there were disputes between Berg and the archbishopric. In 1411 it was agreed by arbitration that the Cologne residents for the life of Archbishop Friedrich III. and Duke Adolf von Berg did not have to pay a Rhine toll or other customs duties when crossing Bergisch areas to and from Westphalia.

This customs remained in the possession of the Berg noble family and their legal successors over the centuries. From 1490, customs were briefly relocated to the town of Monheim , about 30 km south , because the plague had broken out in Düsseldorf .

In addition to the customs post in Düsseldorf, no further Rhine tariffs could be levied in the area of ​​the county and the later Duchy of Berg. In 1425, Duke Adolf von Jülich-Berg received permission from the later Emperor Sigismund to set up a Rhine toll exclusively for merchants from the Duchy of Geldern, but Monheim became a customs post. However, due to the strong resistance of the Duchy of Kleve and Kurköln, this duty was lifted again after a short time. Another attempt to collect this special tariff in Zündorf in 1430 failed before February 1431 due to continued strong resistance. Another toll on the Rhine was imposed by Wilhelm von Jülich-Berg from Emperor Friedrich III. Approved around 1485 in Lülsdorf , against which the Archbishop of Cologne and the City of Cologne immediately protested violently. In 1486 Friedrich III. returned his permit for this customs post. To compensate, the Berger were allowed to increase the Rhine tariff in Düsseldorf by six turns and set up a further land tariff each in the Duchy of Berg and Duchy of Jülich.

However, the salvor had access to other Rhine tolls for a limited time. By buying pawns, they were able to collect a Rhine toll for a few years in Remagen in the 1270s and in Kaiserswerth from 1368. The customs post in Remagen was pledged by a loan to the Reich and that in Kaiserswerth by Kurköln to the Duke of Berg. Furthermore, from 1363 to 1375, the mountain people were able to raise the Rhine toll in Kaub, a dowry from Anna von Kurpfalz when she married Count Wilhelm II von Berg in 1363. Count Palatine Ruprecht I and his son Ruprecht II had this contractually when his granddaughter married promised. The tariff was limited to a total of 24,000 guilders.

In 1767 an attempt was made to open a customs post in Grimlinghausen , which was south of Neuss directly on the left bank of the Rhine and was a Jülich enclave in the Kurkölner area. However, this failed due to resistance, especially by the Archbishop of Cologne.

County or Duchy of Kleve

With the development to the county and then to the duchy of Kleve , the ruling house acquired various Rhine tolls. In an undated document, Count Dietrich III. von Kleve , who ruled from 1173 to 1193, gave the Cistercians of Ten Duinen duty-free transit in the county of Kleve. However, whether this concerned a real Rhine tariff is disputed, since a handling tariff could also be meant. So far, there is no clear evidence. More from customs duty are from 1220 and 1224, in which Graf Dietrich IV. Of Cleves the Ter Doest Abbey and the Teutonic Order relieved of duties river. Here, too, it is unclear whether these exemptions can be assigned to a Rhine tariff. Only for 1241/1242 under Count Dieter IV are four Rhine tariffs listed in Orsoy , Schmithusen , Huissen and Nijmegen , since Kleve was exempted from payment at these customs posts when it was elevated to town. However, these customs rights cannot be documented by the Reich.

Some of the customs posts clearly related to the Rhine toll, such as Kaiserswerth, belonged to Kleve only for a short time. The customs offices in Büderich near Wesel , Grieth , Huissen in Holland, Emmerich , Orsoy, Ruhrort and Schmithausen belonged to the Kleverns for a long time. Due to the close proximity of the customs offices in Grieth and Emmerich, customs duties were temporarily not levied at both customs offices. For example, Emmerich was exempted from customs at the Rees customs post in 1468. In addition, around 1495, the Grieth customs post was relocated to Büderich and Rees for a limited time.

The following provides further information on the customs offices that have been checked by Kleve for a long time:

• Büderich : On January 13, 1290, King Rudolf I transferred the customs of Büderich to Count Theoderich von Kleve . This small place was on the left bank of the Rhine opposite the city of Wesel . Büderich was one of the Klever customs offices for the Rhine toll, in which the Rhine toll was often raised. After brief relocations to Grieth, Griethausen , Orsoy or Rees, Büderich was activated again and again. The attempt of Duke Karl von Egmond to conquer Wesel in 1502 in order to take over the customs privilege of Büderich, however, failed.

• Grieth : At the request of Count Dietrich von Kleve , King Ludwig the Bavarian granted permission in 1336 to move the customs post from Huissen to Grieth. Nevertheless, Grieth only actually became a customs post more than 100 years later, as Kleve had already set up a customs post in Griethausen.

• Griethausen , currently a district of Kleve, can be traced for the first time as a Rhine toll in 1356. Presumably a Klever Waalzoll had been relocated to Nijmegen. In 1363 this Rhine toll was increased by Count Johann von Kleve . Count Adolf I von Kleve confirmed in 1369 that the Rhine tolls were raised for Büderich and Griethausen. From 1385, no more customs duties were levied in Griethausen, the customs post was not active again until 1401. At the end of 1419, the Griethausener Zoll was finally relocated to Orsoy together with the Rheinzoll in Büderich.

• Huissen : The place originally belonged to the county of Geldern . When it and its associated areas fell to Kleve in 1214, there was no Rhine toll there. Huissen is mentioned as a customs post for the first time in a list of the tax exemptions of the city of Kleve. This customs decree was granted by Count Dietrich IV von Kleve in 1242 on the occasion of the city's elevation. However, Huissen was and remained a Klevian enclave, which was surrounded by the Gelderian district of Zutphen . Therefore an attempt was made to move the customs privilege to the county of Kleve. This relocation was confirmed by the German king in 1336.

• Emmerich : This customs post operated by Geldern was relocated to Emmerich in 1318. In 1355 the Geldeners pledged their areas on the right bank of the Rhine to Kleve. Since the deposit was not redeemed, the city of Emmerich and the customs there belonged to the county of Kleve from this time on.

• Orsoy : The levying of a Rhine toll by the Klever can be proven here for the first time between 1238 and 1242. In 1243, Kurköln forced the cessation of tariffs by force of arms. Only for 1272 the levying of the Rhine toll can be documented again for a short time, in 1279 Count Dietrich VI./VIII committed himself. von Kleve to close the customs post as part of a peace treaty.

With the confirmation of the town elevation of September 1, 1347 by Emperor Ludwig of Bavaria , the corresponding freedoms and the customs post for the Rhine toll were mentioned again. According to this, almost no information is available on this customs post. Only from 1419 was the Rhine toll from Büderich and Griethausen moved to Orsoy for a short time. After Brandenburg took over the county of Kleve at the beginning of the 17th century, the Prussians also levied a Rhine toll in Orsoy and operated the customs post until the French came to power in 1794.

Rees, old customs tower

• Rees : There is evidence of a customs post in Rees as early as 1142, which was maintained by the Archbishops of Cologne, but related to a market duty. At that time, Rees was a town on the right bank of the Rhine, which was acquired by the Klever in 1392 through an exchange for the Linn river on the left bank of the Rhine . After that Rees became a customs post of Kleve. Only the period from 1495 to 1500 can be documented as a customs post for a Rhine toll.

• Ruhrort : Emperor Karl IV had given the knight Johann von Moers, a brother of the incumbent Count von Moers , permission in 1371 to levy a tariff on goods “ on land and at sea ” in the area of ​​the “Homberger Werth” . The height of the inch was given with four turns per inch. By shifting the Rhine to the east, this former Werth was now in the area of ​​the Ruhr estuary on the right bank of the Rhine, which at that time was an area of ​​the County of Kleve . Shortly before, the County of Mark had been united with the County of Kleve through personal union. The Count of the Mark probably complained about this loan to a knight from another county , because the customs permit was changed as early as 1372. In addition to the knight Johann, Count Friedrich von Moers and Count Engelbert III. von der Mark jointly authorized to raise this Rhine toll. After the change of fiefdom, the knight Johann von Moers leased his right to customs against payment of a hereditary interest of 50 shields per year to Count Engelbert von der Mark.

In 1379 the German King Wenzel revoked all Rhine tolls between Andernach and Rees. A short time afterwards, however, the approval of the customs for the authorized persons from 1372 in the Homberger Werth area was granted again. In 1392, the Counts of Kleve and von der Mark agreed that the portion of the customs authorization of Count Engelbert von der Mark should go to the Count of Kleve after his death and that the latter would then pay the 50 shields rent to the Moerser. From 1393 onwards, the entire customs revenue came into the hands of the Count of Moers through pledging. The authorization for the collection of this duty by the Count of Moers was confirmed by King Wenzel in 1398. 1411 was by an arbitration decision of the Archbishop of Cologne Friedrich III. The responsibility of Moers for the Rhine toll was reaffirmed, but from 1541 it finally came into the possession of the Kleve dukes without restriction.

• Schmithausen : There was an old customs post here before 1085, which belonged to church institutions in Utrecht . This later came under the influence of the Counts of Geldern through the von Smithusen family. Since the branch of the Rhine where the place was located was silted up at the beginning of the 14th century by relocating the main stream, the customs post had to be closed and was relocated to Emmerich. This relocation was approved by Count Rainald von Geldern in 1318.

County / Duchy of Geldern

Lobith: Gate to the dock of the Rhine ships

The county of Geldern acquired some old Rhine tolls as early as the High Middle Ages, which were originally awarded to church institutions in the Lower Rhine region and in what is now the Netherlands. In addition to the Counts of Kleve, the Counts of Geldern were the first non-ecclesiastical rulers to become holders of river tariffs on the Lower Rhine.

• Rijnwijk near Arnhem : The Counts of Geldern levied customs here as early as 1177. Since at that time some enclaves on the Lower Rhine still belonged to the county of Geldern, the customs offices in Emmerich and Duisburg, for example, were originally also subject to the Geldern.
• Schmithausen : This customs post was the predecessor of the Emmerich customs post. The right for this Rhine toll can be proven for the first time before 1085. The customs clearance for 1085 in Schmithausen was leased in 1219 by the Marienstift in Utrecht to Mechthild von Smithusen, whose family belonged to the Ministrals of the Count of Geldern. This customs post only stayed with Geldern for a short time, as the arm of the Rhine near Schmithausen silted up and the customs post was moved to Emmerich in 1318. The place Emmerich, however, was pledged to the county of Kleve with the customs post in 1345 and then remained with the Klevern.
• Arnhem : The Rijnwijk customs post was probably the forerunner of Arnhem, which served the Guelders as a customs post for a long time. This Arnhem Rhine toll was listed in a contract in 1196. Arnhem already belonged to Geldern at the beginning of the 13th century. In March 1222, Count Gerhard IV. Received permission from King Heinrich VII. With the consent of his father, Emperor Friedrich II. , To move this customs to Lobith.
• Lobith : This was one of the most important and profitable customs posts of the Gelden family. The relocation was carried out immediately, as Count Otto II von Geldern granted a man's fief of eight marks from customs in Lobith in 1236 . In 1247 , a few weeks after his election as German King in Worringen, Count Otto II , Wilhelm von Holland confirmed the customs of Lobith. The empire also received a share of the customs revenue from this customs post. In 1249 Wilhelm von Holland gave Otto's wife Margareth a share of 1,000 marks annually from this duty.

Around the middle of the 14th century, customs were relocated from Lobith to Emmerich. In early 1354, Duke Rainald III pledged . von Geldern paid the Rhine toll for 2,307 gold shields to his brother-in-law, Duke Johann von Kleve , followed in 1355 by a further pledge of an additional 2,000 gold shields.

Duke Karl von Egmond , the last ruler in the Duchy of Geldern, agreed in 1514 with Duke Johann II of Kleve to split the revenue of the Rhine toll in Lobith between Geldern and Kleve by 50% and to employ their own customs officers in the customs post. This agreement was valid for the lifetime of both dukes. In the event that Karl von Egmond died without a male successor, Kleve could also have bought the customs share of the money. This part of the agreement was not kept after the death of Karl von Egmond because, after a short reign of the successor Duke Wilhelm von Jülich-Kleve-Berg , the German Emperor Charles V took over the Duchy of Geldern for the Habsburgs.

Cologne Customs in the 15th century

Although the city of Cologne by the abundance of power of the archbishops of Cologne until after the Battle of Worringen in 1288 reached considerable independence from the church, she had already previously received as a commercial center many privileges. These privileges, which particularly affected the merchants, were regularly confirmed in the city. Examples of this are the newly confirmed customs exemptions from the Rhine toll in Kaiserswerth by Emperor Heinrich IV in 1190 and 1193. These affected the archbishopric and the archbishopric cities and thus also the merchants of Cologne. This was also done in 1301 by King Albrecht , who, among other things, confirmed in a document that Lahnstein, Koblenz, Andernach, Bonn, Neuss and Rheinberg were exempt from customs duties. The Archbishop of Cologne was also bound by this exemption from the Rhine tariffs at the customs stations mentioned. Cologne had also received the right to take over the income of the Cologne customs office for a limited time instead of the archbishopric itself through pledging of the Cologne Archbishop Dietrich II in 1416 .

This was followed by the special case that from 1475 to 1494 the people of Cologne received the right to levy a Rhine toll from the emperor himself. This approval was given because the Cologne people actively supported the empire during the siege of Neuss by Karl the Bold from June 1474 to May 1475. Already after the departure of the Burgundy in 1475, the Emperor Friedrich III. the Cologne cathedral chapter promised income from the Rhine tolls at Rheinberg, Zons and Bonn in the amount of one tournos for a period of twenty years, which, however, was regarded as too low. Because of the high costs involved, the people of Cologne demanded a higher reimbursement of costs from the Reich. The emperor Friedrich III. complied with this request and allowed the city to reimburse the costs with the deed of May 24, 1475. He granted the right to levy a special duty “on all goods that pass Cologne”. From September 8, 1475 this duty was levied.

However, the emperor reserved a share of this duty in the amount of 1,500 guilders per year or, alternatively, a transfer fee of 27,000 guilders. There were various negotiations between the emperor and the city about this, as the Cologne residents considered the amount too high. Since 11 other customs posts were already active from Cologne to Bingen at that time, many objections were immediately raised against this special tariff in Cologne, including from the Rhenish princes of Mainz, Palatinate and Trier, the Landgrave of Hesse and the Duke of Jülich-Berg . The latter achieved tariff relief with the Cologne people for his duchy, while these were rejected for the elector and the landgrave.

Because Cologne was not ready to reduce or abolish the tariff, countermeasures were agreed upon by the electoral princes listed, including the Landgrave of Hesse. For example, the customs duty on wine was tripled by the Palatinate people at their customs offices on the Middle Rhine for Cologne. Since the situation did not improve further, in 1487 the three electors again demanded that the Cologne council lift customs duties. When this did not happen again, the Cologne residents should be banned from shipping on the Rhine. The cited electors, including the Landgrave of Hesse, therefore decided in 1490 to prevent the Cologne residents from being transported on the Rhine both up the Rhine and down the Rhine from Koblenz. The goods had to be transported from Koblenz by land. Down the Rhine, goods could only be reloaded onto ships from Zons.

In the dispute over the Cologne customs, the city was supported by the emperor, who rejected the objections to this customs. Since the shipping traffic was meanwhile severely disrupted by the resistance of the opponents, the emperor personally intervened in the dispute. As a result, negotiations took place in Engers on May 9, 1490, but they were unsuccessful. A renewed proposal by the emperor to initially accept customs from June to October 13, 1490 was rejected by the electors on July 5. Archbishop Hermann of Cologne was one of the opponents of the last proposal .

Nevertheless, the emperor urged the Cologne residents to continue to raise their toll. Since the emperor was stressed by other problems, he could not immediately intervene in the conflict. Since Cologne trade continued to be severely hindered, Cologne was ready to negotiate from the end of 1490. At the Nuremberg Reichstag at the end of May 1491, an agreement was reached with the mediation of King Maximilian and the Bishop of Eichstätt . Thereafter, the Cologne customs had to end by June 24, 1494. Cologne also undertook to pay the three electors a share of 5,000 guilders per year from customs.

Brandenburg-Prussia

With the takeover of the Duchy of Kleve in 1614/1666 through the dissolution of the United Duchies of Jülich-Kleve-Berg , the Electors of Brandenburg came to the previous Kleve customs posts for the Rhine toll. Before that, Brandenburg was only involved in income from Rheinzöllen in special cases, if these were agreed for the repayment of loans from Brandenburg to a borrower who was the holder of a Rhine toll. An early such hedge can be demonstrated for 1314, for example. The new Rhine toll granted by the king to the Archbishop of Cologne at that time was eight turnoses and was intended for the Bonn customs post. An optional relocation to Leutesdorf was permitted. However, when relocating to Leutersdorf, a debt of the Margrave Waldemar von Brandenburg , which he had granted to the archbishop, had to be paid off, as this was secured via Bonn.

The income from the Rheinzolls acquired from the customs offices in the area of ​​the former Duchy of Kleve was an important and secure income for the Brandenburgers, which significantly improved the finances of the relatively poor electorate. In the second half of the 17th century, an average of 40,000 thalers per year was expected.

After the Congress of Vienna in 1815, the left area on the Rhine between Nahe and the Netherlands belonged largely to the Kingdom of Prussia . Of the historical customs posts in this area, the customs offices of Emmerich, Wesel, Ruhrort, Düsseldorf, Cologne, Andernach, Linz and Koblenz were initially active again under the Prussians until the end of 1828. There was no duty to be paid for goods that were transported on Rhine ships with loading and unloading between Emmerich and Koblenz. Prussian duty was due for all goods that came from before Emmerich up the Rhine or beyond Emmerich down the Rhine. The same applied to goods near Koblenz.

At the beginning of 1829 the customs offices in Wesel, Ruhrort, Andernach and Linz were closed and due customs duties had to be paid at the next open customs office. With the cabinet order of September 19, 1829, the tariff rates were modified. The basis for the duty was a quantity of goods of 50 kg and the duty amount was calculated in centimes. The following tariff rates were set for goods that came or went from outside the Prussian territories (only a few as an example of the amount of the duty):

• from Emmerich to Düsseldorf → 72.41250
• from Düsseldorf to Koblenz → 33.5775
• Koblenz to Linz or Cologne → 18,190
• Cologne to Emmerich → 48.13875

From the Rhine Shipping Act of Mainz 1831, the inner German Rhine tariffs and thus also the Prussian tariffs were no longer levied. The cross-border Rhine tariffs for transports in the Netherlands also ceased to apply to Prussia with the Mannheim Act of 1868.

Further Rhine tolls on the Lower and Middle Rhine

In addition to the above-mentioned Rhine tariffs of the dioceses and duchies, which existed for many centuries, there were also other verifiable tariffs that were either active for a short time or changed hands several times. In the High Middle Ages, the empire's customs posts were all pledged to financiers and changed to new owners. Below are some of these customs offices:

Kaiserswerth: ruins of the imperial palace

• Tiel , one of the oldest customs posts in the empire, which was on the Waal in the Betuwe , can already be documented for 896. Emperor Friedrich Barbarossa had this duty between 1152 and 1174
• Kaiserswerth was relocated and the existing castle there was expanded to make it an imperial palace . As early as 1273, King Rudolf I gave the imperial palace to Archbishop Engelbert II of Cologne for life , but without full rights to the Rhine toll. When the successor of Engelbrecht II, Archbishop Siegfried von Westerburg , began to raise the Rhine toll illegally for the archbishopric, this was met with opposition from Rudolf I. He forced the archbishop to open the customs post for Archbishopric from 1282 with the peace of the land for the Rhineland proclaimed in 1281 conclude.

But already in 1293 and 1298 both King Adolf von Nassau and his successor King Albrecht pledged the Rhine toll at Kaiserswerth back to the Archbishops of Cologne . The pledge of 1292 was the compensation for the assumption of the coronation costs by the archbishop. In contrast, the second pledge from 1298, which in addition to the deposit fee of 36,000 marks also included Reichsburg and the town of Kaiserswerth, was also intended as a “compensation” for Siegfried von Westerburg for his losses. After the lost battle of Worringen , the archbishop had to make extensive concessions to his opponents in order to be released from captivity. The Pope had declared these promises to be illegal and asked the King and the other archbishops to support the Archbishop of Cologne in revoking the concessions.

The customs then changed hands several times over further pledges. In 1353, the Rhine toll was pledged to the former through a loan from "nobleman Friedrich von Reiferscheid" to King Charles IV . Another pledge was made, for example, in 1368 by Count Wilhelm II of Jülich for 57.5931.5 gold florins to Ruprecht II of the Palatinate . After this pledge was redeemed, armed violence broke out in 1397 with the battle of Kleverhamm .

In 1424 Duke Adolf von Kleve-Mark sold the customs post for 100,000 guilders to Archbishop Dietrich of Cologne , who now maintained this customs post with only brief interruptions until the middle of the 18th century. Since Kaiserswerth was located in the Duchy of Berg near the Bergisch residence of Düsseldorf, the Electoral Palatinate later tried to gain sovereignty over the customs post through the Imperial Court of Justice. According to the judgments of the court of 1762 and 1772, Elector Karl Theodor now received customs rights for the Electoral Palatinate. However, when the Duchy of Berg was ceded to the French in 1805, this legal claim was lost again.

• Braubach was another customs post on the Rhine. Count Hermann I. von Henneberg received 1252 at the Reichstag of Frankfurt a / M. permission from Wilhelm von Holland , whose brother-in-law the count was, to raise this new Rhine toll in Braubach. Just a few years later, this customs post was passed on to “Gottfried III. from Eppstein ”. In 1261 he issued the Koblenz House of the Teutonic Order a duty exemption for their wine transports for Braubach. Due to the Worms Landfrieden, a tariff collection was last detectable in April 1269.

However, the customs post was in the County of Katzenelnbogen and thus in a foreign territory. Count Eberhard von Katzenelnbogen bought Braubach as early as 1283 , but without an active Rhine toll. Otherwise no further data are known for this customs post. Another customs post that was only operated for a short time was in

• Sterrenberg , an imperial castle on the right bank of the Rhine. A Rhine toll was verifiable in 1247, when the Reichstruchsess Werner IV von Bolanden forbade his customs officers there to collect this toll from the Teutonic Order . After 1263 the customs post could no longer be proven. Presumably it was also abolished in 1269 by the Worms Land Peace.
• St. Goar was the location of a customs post, which was also in the area of ​​the Rhine, which was problematic for shipping. This Rhine toll can be verified for the first time in 1219. In a document for this customs post, Count Dieter III exempted. von Katzenelnbogen the Cistercian monastery Eberbach from all customs duties in St. Goar, which also affected the Rhine toll. The customs post then became inactive again, as Emperor Friedrich II did not confirm this Rhine tariff to Count Diether IV von Katzenelnbogen and the tariff collection was discontinued in 1235 as part of the Peace of Mainz.

It was not until Count Diether V. von Katzenelnbogen , who began building Rheinfels Castle as a customs fortress in 1245, that the customs post was reactivated around 1250. This duty exemption for the Rheinfels customs station near St. Goar was confirmed to the Eberbach monastery in 1252 by Count Dieter V. Although the Count had been a member of the Rhenish Association of Cities since 1255, Rheinfels Castle was besieged unsuccessfully by the mercenaries of the Association of cities for a year and a half from 1256.

Until 1371, Count Wilhelm II. Built Katz Castle on the right bank of the Rhine from the same noble house as a customs fortress. As a result, the Katzenelnburger was able to levy customs duties for both the “uphill journey” and for the “downhill journey” of the ships on the Rhine, and there was thus a “St. Goarer double inch ”. 1445 confirmed Emperor Friedrich III. Count Philipp I von Katzenelnbogen all fiefdoms, including the Rhine toll at St. Goar.

In 1479 this duty fell to the Landgraves of Hesse. Henry III. von Hessen had married the heiress "Anna von Katzenelnbogen" and, as there was no male successor, was able to take over this duty for the Landgraviate of Hessen . Until the French occupied the left bank of the Rhine at the end of the 18th century, the customs post remained with the Hessians.

Katz Castle

• Geisenheim was a customs post of the empire at the beginning of the High Middle Ages. Around 1160 Werner II von Bolanden , who was Ministerial Minister under Emperor Barbarossa, had this imperial fief. The Rhine toll came from Werner II by inheritance to the Rheingrafen . There is evidence that this granted some church institutions customs privileges for this customs post in the first half of the 13th century. The approved tariffs were low, so that with the “Landfrieden von 1235” Geisenheim was one of the few customs offices that did not have to be closed and where the “old Schifzol” duty could continue to be levied.

Since the counts became dependent on Kurmainz and the noble family died out before the end of the High Middle Ages, the customs post was active until the middle of the 15th century. However, there were still limited activities in the 16th century. For 1566, records showed that of the sixty-five boatmen who passed through customs during the Frankfurt Autumn Fair, only thirty-two were willing to pay a duty.

• Trechtingshausen is a small town on the left bank of the Rhine, north of Bingen, in which a customs post was provable for a short time in the 13th century. This Rhine toll belonged to the Reich Ministerial "Philipp von Hohenfels" and was given to him in 1253 as a fief. In 1260 this Philip granted the Koblenz Teutonic Order House duty-free for this customs post. Customs were lifted as early as 1269, presumably as one of the results of the Worms Land Peace. After 1269 there was no evidence of a toll on the Rhine at this location.

It is controversial whether

• Bingen was a customs post for a Rhine toll. In addition to various documents from the 12th century in which tariffs were listed but they were probably not Rhine tariffs, there was a clear statement from the 14th century. In a document from 1329, Archbishop Balduin von Trier freed the Marienhausen monastery from various Rhine tolls at customs posts on the Middle Rhine. One of the listed customs offices was Bingen. No other clear evidence is yet available. There is therefore some evidence that a Rhine tariff was quoted in Bingen, but that a market tariff was actually meant.

Another customs post in the High Middle Ages on the Rhine was in

• Angeren , a place about 2.5 km upstream from Huissen. For this river tariff, which was presumably an imperial tariff, there are essentially only tariff exemptions. The first such exemption from customs duties was issued by Emperor Heinrich IV in 1074 for the citizens of Worms. Further customs exemptions or confirmations of older exemptions were from King Konrad III. 1145, Kaiser Friedrich I. 1184 and Kaiser Friedrich II. 1226. The news of 1226 is also the last of this Rhine toll. Apparently the customs post was lifted afterwards, as the customs post in "Huissen", which is only a few kilometers downstream, was first detectable as early as 1242. The Rhine tariff in Huissen was not an imperial tariff, but was given to the county of Kleve. In 1242 Count Dietrich IV released the city of Kleve from paying this Rhine toll.

The oldest castle on the Middle Rhine, which was besieged and conquered by Emperor Heinrich II as early as 1020

• Hammerstein , was drafted as an imperial estate around 1035 and was a customs post of the empire from the middle of the 11th century. In 1074, Emperor Heinrich IV granted the Worms an exemption from the Rhine toll near Hammerstein. This exemption from duty was confirmed to the Worms several times up to 1208. After that there was no further information about this customs post for about a hundred years, which was probably no longer active until the end of the 13th century. Only King Albrecht reactivated the Hammerstein customs office around 1305. However, from 1308 the Archbishop of Cologne tried to have the customs post lifted again. In January 1309 the customs post was probably relocated from Hammerstein to the nearby town of Leutesdorf up the Rhine. In April 1309 the Archbishop of Cologne bought the Hammerstein Rhine toll for 6,000 marks and was allowed to move it to Bonn with royal permission. The customs post in Leutesdorf initially continued to exist and was not closed until 1314, also due to the efforts of the archbishop.

Around 1315 the customs post in Hammerstein was active again for a short time. In 1319, Count Johann von Nassau and Simon von Sponheim were granted another Rhine toll by King Friedrich for a limited period of five years. After that, the customs post was largely inactive until 1616 a Mosel toll was transferred to Hammerstein.

Another customs post on the Rhine for which few concrete facts are available and which was only active for a short time was in

• Remagen . In writings that were partially recognized as forgeries, customs rights in the 12th century were cited for Deutz Abbey , but these were market duties. Specifically, the Archbishop of Cologne seems to have levied a Rhine toll in Remagen at the time of the Bacharach peace treaty in 1317. In 1317 the Archbishop was instructed by Emperor Friedrich II to close the customs posts in Cologne and Remagen. The Rhine toll was levied in Remagen until 1322, because according to an arbitration ruling from 1321, Count Gerhard V von Jülich had to move part of the customs in Remagen to the Bonn customs office. 1384 gave King Wenceslas the Duke William II. Of Jülich with his wife an annuity of 300 guilders from the Rhine at Remagen inches. For this purpose, the duke should ensure that the customs post could be kept in operation. However, there are no further reports on the customs post and annuity, so that this duty was probably not implemented. Only in March 1473 was customs moved from Bonn and levied in Remagen for a month. In April of the same year this customs had already been moved to Linz.

Customs facilities on the Upper Rhine

There were also various customs posts on the Upper Rhine, such as Basel , Germersheim , Mannheim , Neuburg am Rhein , Oppenheim , Selz , Speyer , Strasbourg and Worms , but these became less important for trade down the Rhine from the end of the Middle Ages onwards. The reason for this was the shift in the share of oriental trade, which ran via northern Italy to the western areas of the German Empire. With the beginning of modern times after the discovery of America and the sea route to East Asia, the main trade shifted more and more to ship transport from the northwest to the south.

There were also objections, disputes and feuds about the Upper Rhine customs posts and their customs duties. For example, the abolition of customs duties in Speyer and Worms was sought by the cities of Mainz and Frankfurt am Main in 1382. Attempts were made to obtain the support of the Rhenish electors for this. This demand to lift the customs duties in Speyer and Worms was followed by other cities with the formation of a "Rhenish City Association". The matter was temporarily settled in an arbitration award in 1383.

The following information about some customs posts on the Upper Rhine:

• Oppenheim , a free imperial city with an imperial castle in the High Middle Ages , was originally an old customs post of the empire, which was briefly pledged to the Archdiocese of Mainz in the 14th century and was temporarily used by them as a customs post. At the beginning of the 15th century, King Ruprecht pledged the Rhine toll to his son Count Palatine Ludwig III. for 100,000 gold guilders. In the meantime, from 1398 onwards, Oppenheim belonged to the Count Palatinate of the Rhine and the customs post remained with the Electoral Palatinate for a long time since it was no longer released by the Reich.
• Worms is one of the customs posts about which there is already news from the Carolingian period. In 858, King Ludwig the German freed Lorch Monastery from customs duties on the Rhine and especially from those in the port of Worms. This duty exemption, however, presumably related to a ship duty that was payable on arrival of a ship in the port of Worms. Another early documentary evidence dates from 947. In a document, Otto the Great confirmed to Worms “Bishop Richgowo” that he was responsible for the Worms customs duties (omne theloneum). This confirmation is likely to have affected both market, ship, port and transit tariffs. From the beginning of the High Middle Ages, many exemptions from imperial tariffs, including the Rhine tariffs, have been documented for the Worms merchants, which were granted and confirmed by the German kings and emperors and which can be proven as "Worms privilege" from 1074.
• Germersheim was a customs post of the empire, which was pledged by King Ludwig the Bavarian, including the city, to the count palatine for 6000 marks silver. However, part of the customs revenue remained with the empire, as Emperor Karl IV . Awarded two more turnoses to Count Palatinate Rudolf II in 1350 . In 1356 the Count Palatine was confirmed another turnose in addition to his eight turnoses from this customs post. In 1367 Germersheim became practically a customs post of the Electoral Palatinate through Emperor Charles IV, as the Count Palatinate had supported his election, and these received an additional 4,000 guilders and a turnose. This was followed in 1389 by King Wenzel another award of two turnoses to the Countess Palatinate, which presumably replaced the last share of the empire's participation in the customs revenue of this customs post.
• In Selz , in French Seltz, a town on the Upper Rhine in Alsace, there was an old customs post of the empire, which was mentioned in 1315 by the Count of Spanheim because of a demand for 1200 marks of silver from customs. In 1361 Emperor Karl IV transferred this customs post to Burgrave Friedrich V of Nuremberg for life; the permit was confirmed by the Emperor in 1364.
• Speyer , as well as a customs post and a warehouse for goods, originally belonged to the Reich. Through shares in the customs revenue, which the emperors and kings had granted "meritorious vassals", the empire had fewer and fewer shares of the customs revenue. This led in 1483 to the fact that Emperor Friedrich III. gave the customs post to the bishop of Speyer.
• A new customs post was opened in Philippsburg in late autumn 1673, as Strasbourg had come under French influence. Attempts were made to compensate for the impending loss of the local customs, which also occurred in 1681 through the occupation of the French, with this new customs post
• Mannheim was another customs post of the empire on the Upper Rhine. From the Rhine toll there, Emperor Charles IV granted the Count Palatine Rudolf II a share of two turnoses in 1349 and confirmed him in 1356 a total of six turnoses. In 1386 King Wenzel confirmed four turnoses to the Count Palatine Ruprecht I and expanded them in 1389 for the Countess Palatine by two turnoses each at the customs offices in Mannheim and Germersheim.

End of the Rhine tolls

French period

With the conquest of the areas on the left Middle and Lower Rhine by the French from 1794, the end of the feudal system began first on the left of the Rhine and from 1806 onwards with the further advance of the French on the right of the Rhine. This also led to considerable changes with regard to the Rhine tariffs. Trade and economy were severely hampered by the separation of the areas on the left and right of the Rhine. In addition, the change to French customs practice and its organization dragged on for years and the old handling and stacking rights of the trading cities of Mainz and Cologne were called into question. During the Rastatt Congress from 1797 to 1799, the French had already sought to abolish these old rights.

From the end of 1797 to the beginning of 1798, new French tariffs were put into effect on the left bank of the Rhine. At this time, customs was levied in 17 places on the left bank of the Rhine between Orsoy and Mainz. In the Rastatt negotiations, the French had achieved the repeal of the handling law and the compulsory guild, but Mainz and Cologne were able to delay the enforcement of the repeal of the stacking law for decades.

The introduction and implementation of the new French customs laws continued to lead to considerable problems and a marked decline in shipments. Especially before 1806, when ships landing on the right bank made it possible to bypass the French customs offices, disputes with the French customs officers were the norm. In April 1804 they confiscated 18 ships from the Upper Rhine in Cologne, including the loaded goods, “because of errors in the declaration of the goods”. This action led to a further decline in shipping on the Rhine.

In order to achieve clearer customs laws, the Octro Convention was introduced on November 1, 1805, which finally replaced the last remnants of the old Rhine customs regulations. Due to this convention, taxes were payable if the ships were larger than 50 t and the octroi were for the cargo. This levy was a fee to improve the river conditions on the Rhine and to cover organizational costs. The previous French customs posts were Orsoy, Uerdingen, Zons, Bonn, Andernach, Koblenz, St. Goar, Bacharach and Bingen. On the right bank of the Rhine there were 10 customs posts between Lobith and Kaub. As part of the new octroi rules, the number of customs posts could be reduced to 6 each on the left and right of the Rhine from the Lower to the Upper Rhine at the request of the French. On the left are Griethausen, Uerdingen (Homberg), Cologne, Andernach, Mainz and Lauterburg (Neuburg) and on the right Wesel, Düsseldorf, Linz, Thal (opposite Koblenz), Wellmich and Mannheim. The sum of the octroi income was considerable. From 1805 to 1813 it was over 17 million francs.

After Napoleon had crushed the Prussians in the double battle at Jena and Auerstedt in mid-October 1806, only the English were serious opponents in Western Europe. Since the French fleet had already largely been destroyed, Napoleon tried to weaken England by means of a trade blockade. With a first decree of November 1806, he ordered a continental barrier, which banned all trade in English goods. The consequence was inevitably a further tightening of trade laws and hindrances to trade on the Rhine.

The dispute over the abolition of the handling law in Cologne and Mainz continued unchanged. In April 1813, in a personal conversation with Napoleon, the Mainz-based company obtained that Napoleon agreed to the continued validity of the stacking law in Mainz and Cologne. However, due to the collapse of the French Empire at the end of 1813, this promise was of little practical importance, but this right initially continued to exist after the end of the French era.

Time after the Congress of Vienna

Congress of Vienna

After the French had largely withdrawn from the areas on the Rhine in January 1814, the provisions of the Rheinoktroi remained valid. The previous French leaders and officials were immediately replaced by Dutch and German-speaking officials. After that, the old local responsibilities began to be restored, which in particular led to problems between the Dutch and the new administrations on the Lower, Middle and Upper Rhine with regard to tariffs and unhindered shipping to the sea. The sum of the Rhine tariffs levied remained high. For example, it was over 25.7 million francs for the period from 1815 to 1824.

The negotiations at the Congress of Vienna also concerned the Rhine trade and in May 1815 led to a decision to revoke the stacking rights in Mainz and Cologne. But again Mainz and Cologne were able to delay the lifting of the stacking right. Despite the clarification of political responsibilities in the entire area of ​​the Rhine with the conclusion of the congress at the end of 1815, the problems between the Kingdom of the United Netherlands and the German states on the Rhine (at that time Prussia, Hesse, Baden and Bavaria) with regard to the conditions for freight traffic continued on the Rhine. Since after the Congress of Vienna the Rhineland on the entire Middle and Lower Rhine now belonged to the Prussian Rhine Province , Prussia was particularly interested in improving the conditions for Rhine trade and a free connection to sea trade.

After the Belgian Revolution in 1830, when the Catholic south of the Netherlands separated as the new state of Belgium, the Netherlands began to rethink the advantages and disadvantages of largely free navigation on the entire Rhine. By 1831, the Rhine Shipping Act of Mainz succeeded in lifting the restrictions on trade in the German area of ​​the Rhine. The many old "Rhine tariffs" were replaced by a few simplified state tariffs and all shipping charges, including the stacking rights of Cologne and Mainz, were no longer applicable. The remaining problems with the Netherlands, which concerned free access to the North Sea, were resolved with the Mannheim Act agreed on October 17, 1868 , since the same applies to the Rhine and its estuary in the Netherlands as well as in the German area of ​​the Rhine applicable regulations from 1831 were adopted.

literature

• Joseph Franz Ockhart: Historical representation of the earlier and later legislation on customs and merchant shipping on the Rhine. Mainz 1818 Digitized edition of the ULB Düsseldorf
• Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rhenish transit tariffs in the Middle Ages. Akademie Verlag, Berlin 1997.

Web links

• Publications on Rheinzoll in the Opac of the Regesta Imperii
• Publications on Rheinzölle in the Opac of the Regesta Imperii.
• Publications on customs duties / Rhineland in the Opac of the Regesta Imperii
• Clemens von Looz-Corswarem: On the development of shipping on the Rhine from the Middle Ages to the 19th century (PDF) 1996, publication on the 100th anniversary of the Düsseldorf ports.
• Theodor Joseph Lacomblet : Document books for the history of the Lower Rhine (1840–1858), Volumes 1 to 4, Digital Collection for the Rhineland Regional History, University and Regional Library Bonn

Individual evidence

1. ↑ Ockhart, Joseph Franz, in: Historical background of the earlier and later legislation on tariffs and commercial navigation of the Rhine. 1818, p. [68] 50. Online version
2. ↑ Ockhart, Joseph Franz, in: Historical background of the earlier and later legislation on tariffs and commercial navigation of the Rhine. 1818, pp. [103/104] 85/86. Online version
3. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, p. 44.
4. ↑ ^{a b c} In: Annual report of the municipal commercial training institute in Frankfurt am Main. 1905 to 1907, p. [8] 6. Online version
5. ↑ W. John, in: Annals of the Historical Association for the Lower Rhine. Issue 48, 1889, p. [61] 51. Online version
6. ↑ ^{a b c} Looz-Corswarem, Clemens von, in: On the development of shipping on the Rhine from the Middle Ages to the 19th century. 1996, publication on the 100th anniversary of the Düsseldorf harbor, p. 2.
7. ^ Looz-Corswarem, Clemens von, in: On the development of Rhine shipping from the Middle Ages to the 19th century. 1996, publication on the 100th anniversary of the Düsseldorf harbor, pp. 2 + 14.
8. ↑ Looz-Corswarem, Clemens von, in: On the development of Rhine shipping from the Middle Ages to the 19th century. 1996, publication on the 100th anniversary of the Düsseldorf harbor, p. 3.
9. ^ Looz-Corswarem, Clemens von, in: On the development of Rhine shipping from the Middle Ages to the 19th century. 1996, publication for the 100th anniversary of the Düsseldorf harbor, pp. 9 to 12.
10. ^ Looz-Corswarem, Clemens von, in: On the development of Rhine shipping from the Middle Ages to the 19th century. 1996, publication on the 100th anniversary of the Düsseldorf harbor, pp. 21 to 24.
11. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Akademie Verlag, Berlin, 1997, pp. 12 to 29.
12. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Akademie Verlag, Berlin, 1997, pp. 20 to 22.
13. ↑ ^{a b} In: Annual report of the municipal commercial training institute in Frankfurt am Main . School year 1906-1907, p. [7] 5. Chapter: The collection of shipping taxes on the German inland waterways
14. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Akademie Verlag, Berlin, 1997, p. 26.
15. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Akademie Verlag, Berlin, 1997, pp. 47 to 50 + 55.
16. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Akademie Verlag, Berlin, 1997, p. 104.
17. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Akademie Verlag, Berlin, 1997, pp. 117 to 128.
18. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Akademie Verlag, Berlin, 1997, p. 161.
19. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Akademie Verlag, Berlin, 1997, p. 169.
20. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Akademie Verlag, Berlin, 1997, pp. 129 to 132.
21. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Akademie Verlag, Berlin 1997, pp. 176 to 180.
22. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Akademie Verlag, Berlin, 1997, pp. 180 to 182.
23. ↑ Lacomblet, Theodor Joseph: Document book for the history of the Lower Rhine or the Archbishopric of Cologne, document No. 628. Volume 3, 1853, p. [542] 530. Digitized edition ULB Bonn
24. ↑ Lacomblet, Theodor Joseph: Document book for the history of the Lower Rhine or the Archbishopric of Cologne, Certificate No. 124. Volume 2, 1846, p. [104] 66. Digitized edition ULB Bonn
25. ^ In: Düsseldorfer Geschichtsverein / contribution to the history of the Lower Rhine , 8th volume, 1889, p. [249] 242. Online version
26. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, p. 639.
27. ↑ Schröder, Richard; Künßberg, Eberhard: Textbook of German legal history. 1932, p. [591] 575. Online version
28. ↑ Ockhart, Joseph Franz, in: Historical background of the earlier and later legislation on tariffs and commercial navigation of the Rhine. 1818, p. [235] 215. Online version
29. ↑ Ockhart, Franz Joseph: Historical background of the earlier and later legislation on tariffs and commercial navigation of the Rhine. 1818, p. [167] 149. Online version
30. ↑ Ockhart, Franz Joseph: Historical background of the earlier and later legislation on tariffs and commercial navigation of the Rhine. 1818, p. [231] 213. Online version
31. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, p. 259.
32. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, p. 368.
33. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, p. 373.
34. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Akademie Verlag, Berlin, 1997, pp. 391 + 392.
35. ↑ Ockhart, Franz Joseph: Historical background of the earlier and later legislation on tariffs and commercial navigation of the Rhine. 1818, pp. [165/167] 147/149. Online version
36. ↑ Ockhart, Franz Joseph: Historical background of the earlier and later legislation on tariffs and commercial navigation of the Rhine. 1818, p. [167] 149. Online version
37. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, p. 446.
38. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, p. 460.
39. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, pp. 512 to 514.
40. ↑ Ockhart, Joseph Franz, in: Historical background of the earlier and later legislation on tariffs and commercial navigation of the Rhine. 1818, p. [223] 205. Online version
41. ^ In: Annual report of the municipal commercial college in Frankfurt am Main. Frankfurt, 1905 to 1907, p. [10] 8. Online version
42. ↑ H. v. Eicken: On the history of the city of Ruhrort. In: Journal of the Bergisches Geschichtsverein. Book No. 17, 1882, p. 3. Online version
43. ↑ Ockhart, Franz Joseph: Historical background of the earlier and later legislation on tariffs and commercial navigation of the Rhine. 1818, p. [168] 150. Online version
44. ↑ Ockhart, Franz Joseph: Historical background of the earlier and later legislation on tariffs and commercial navigation of the Rhine. 1818, p. [169] 151. Online version
45. ↑ Ockhart, Franz Joseph: Historical background of the earlier and later legislation on tariffs and commercial navigation of the Rhine. 1818, p. [234] 216. Online version
46. ↑ Ockhart, Franz Joseph: Historical background of the earlier and later legislation on tariffs and commercial navigation of the Rhine. 1818, p. [235] 217. Online version
47. ↑ Ockhart, Franz Joseph: Historical background of the earlier and later legislation on tariffs and commercial navigation of the Rhine. 1818, p. [238] 220. Online version
48. ^ In: Annual report of the municipal commercial training institute in Frankfurt a. Main. Frankfurt, 1905 to 1907, p. [9] 7. Online version
49. ↑ Lacomblet, Theodor Joseph: Document book for the history of the Lower Rhine and the Archbishopric of Cöln, document 454. Volume 4, 1858, p. [590] 564. Online edition 2009 nbn-resolving.de
50. ↑ ^{a b} Christian Hillen. In: LVR Internet portal Rheinische Geschichte . The Cologne pile
51. ^ W. John: In: Annals of the Historical Association for the Lower Rhine. Issue 48, 1889, p. [43] 33. Online version
52. ↑ ^{a b c} Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rhenish transit tolls in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, p. 83.
53. ↑ Iltgen, Friedrich, in: The settlements on the Lower Rhine , 1892, p. [17] 15. Online version
54. ↑ Scholten, Robert, in: Die Stadt Kleve , 1879, p. [31] 23. Online version
55. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. 1997, Berlin, p. 330.
56. ↑ In: Baedeker, The Rhineland. 1909, pp. [157] 82 + [162] 827 + [167] 92. Online version
57. ↑ This Count Diether III. is also given as Count Diether V.
58. ↑ Wenck, Helfrick Bernhard, in: Hessische Landes Geschichte: With document book. Volume 1, p. 319. Online version
59. ↑ Lacomblet, Theodor Joseph, in: Document book for the history of the Lower Rhine or the Archbishopric of Cologne, certificate no. 343. Volume 3, 1853, p. [289] 269. Online edition 2009 nbn-resolving.de
60. ↑ Lacomblet, Theodor Joseph, in: Document book for the history of the Lower Rhine or the Archbishopric of Cologne, document no. 118. Volume 3, 1853, p. [877] 865. Online edition 2009 nbn-resolving.de
61. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, p. 331.
62. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, pp. 332 to 636.
63. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, p. 337.
64. ↑ Theodor Joseph Lacomblet, in: Document book for the history of the Lower Rhine and the Archbishopric of Cöln, Document 382 , Volume 1, 1840 p. [280] 264. Online edition 2009 nbn-resolving.de
65. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, p. 201.
66. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, p. 388.
67. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, p. 506.
68. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, p. 318.
69. ↑ ^{a b} Ockhart, Joseph Franz, in: Historical presentation of the earlier and later legislation on customs and merchant shipping on the Rhine. 1818, [225] 207. Online version
70. ^ City of Lahnstein, online version under history: Chronology of Lahnstein city history. Year 1298.
71. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, p. 307.
72. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, p. 656.
73. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Akademieverlag, Berlin, 1997, p. 377.
74. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, p. 296.
75. ↑ Baedeker, Karl, in: Travel Guide: The Rhineland, Black Forest and Vosges. 1909, 31st edition, p. [157] 82. Online version
76. ↑ Baedeker, Karl, in: Travel Guide: The Rhineland, Black Forest and Vosges. 1909, 31st edition, p. [162] 87. Online version
77. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, pp. 302 + 303.
78. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, p. 288.
79. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, p. 289.
80. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, p. 547.
81. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, p. 215.
82. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, p. 87.
83. ^ In: Annual report of the Städtischen Realgymnasium zu Chemnitz , 1888, p. [17] 17. Online version
84. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, p. 215.
85. ^ Regionalgeschichte.net. In: Stolzenfels on the Rhine . to the history of Stolzenfels
86. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, p. 207.
87. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, p. 206.
88. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, pp. 636 to 640.
89. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, p. 300.
90. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, p. 301.
91. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, pp. 240/241.
92. ^ ^{A b c} Schwann, Mathieu: History of the Cologne Chamber of Commerce. 1906, p. [267] 233. Online version
93. ↑ Lacomblet, Theodor Joseph: Document book for the history of the Lower Rhine and the Archbishopric of Cöln, document 186 . Volume 1, 1840, p. 118. Online edition 2009 nbn-resolving.de
94. ↑ Friedrich Pfeiffer. In: The donation of Zolls Esserden by Heinrich IV. To the Archbishop of Cologne Anno II. Uni Bonn, Rheinische Vierteljahrsblätter , vol. 61, 1997, pp. [56-65] 34-49.
95. ↑ Baedeker: The Rhineland. Edition from 1909.
96. ↑ Lacomblet, Theodor Joseph: Document book for the history of the Lower Rhine and the Archbishopric of Cöln, document 592 . Volume 1, 1840, p. [408] 392.
97. ↑ Lacomblet, Theodor Joseph: Document book for the history of the Lower Rhine or the Archbishopric of Cologne, Certificate No. 8. Volume 3, 1853, p. [25] 5. Digitized edition ULB Bonn
98. ↑ Lacomblet, Theodor Joseph, in: Document book for the history of the Lower Rhine or the Archbishopric of Cologne, certificate no. 90. Volume 3, 1853, p. [86] 66. Digitized edition ULB Bonn
99. ^ Wilhelm Janssen. In: The Lower Rhine Territories in the Late Middle Ages. University of Bonn, Rheinische Vierteljahrsblätter . 2000, ed. 64, p. [104] 66.
100. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, pp. 510/511.
101. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, p. 512.
102. ↑ Lacomblet, Theodor Joseph: Document book for the history of the Lower Rhine or the Archbishopric of Cologne, certificate no. 168. Volume 3, 1853, p. [157] 137. Digitized edition ULB Bonn
103. ↑ Lacomblet, Theodor Joseph: Document book for the history of the Lower Rhine or the Archbishopric of Cologne, certificate no. 783 . Volume 3, 1853, pp. [697] 685. Digitized edition ULB Bonn
104. ↑ Lacomblet, Theodor Joseph: Archive for the history of the Lower Rhine , In: Düsseldorf with a constant view of the country's history, second section . IV. Volume, 1863, Düsseldorf, p. [291] 279. Online version
105. ↑ ^{a b} Föhl, Walther: Uerdinger Bibliographie. 1965, p. [92] 86. Online version
106. ^ Schwann, Mathieu: History of the Cologne Chamber of Commerce. 1906, p. [159] 126. Online version
107. ↑ Richard Pick. In: Annals of the historical association for the Lower Rhine, in particular the old archdiocese of Cologne. Section: On the history and the former office of Rheinberg . 1883, No. 39, p. [140] 130. Online version
108. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Akademie Verlag, Berlin, 1997, pp. 289, 290.
109. ↑ Lacomblet, Theodor Joseph: Document book for the history of the Lower Rhine or the Archbishopric of Cologne, document no. 139. Volume 3, 1853, p. [124] 104. Digitized edition ULB Bonn
110. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Akademie Verlag, Berlin, 1997, p. 292.
111. ↑ Lacomblet, Theodor Joseph: Document book for the history of the Lower Rhine or the Archbishopric of Cologne, document no. 737. Volume 3, 1853, p. [645] 633. Digitized edition ULB Bonn
112. ↑ Lacomblet, Theodor Joseph: Document book for the history of the Lower Rhine and the Archbishopric of Cöln, certificate 561. Volume 4, 1858, p. [729] 703. Online edition 2009 nbn-resolving.de
113. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, pp. 312/313.
114. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, pp. 33 + 248.
115. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, p. 249.
116. ^ Menzel, Karl: Contributions to the history of the Rheinischen Städtebundes. Ohlar, 1859, p. [16] 16. Online version
117. ^ Tucking, Karl: History of the city of Neuss. 1891, p. [39] 23. Online version
118. ↑ Lacomblet, Theodor Joseph: Document book for the history of the Lower Rhine or the Archbishopric of Cologne, document no. 654. Volume 3, 1853, p. [564] 552. Digitized edition ULB Bonn
119. ↑ Lacomblet, Theodor Joseph, in: Document book for the history of the Lower Rhine or the Archbishopric of Cologne, certificate no. 546. Volume 3, 1853, p. [464] 452. Digitized edition ULB Bonn
120. ↑ Lacomblet, Theodor Joseph: Archive for the history of the Lower Rhine. In: XIII. The last traces of the Franconian Salhof in Neuss . Volume 2, 1857, p. [356] 340. Online version
121. ↑ Lacomblet, Theodor Joseph: Archive for the history of the Lower Rhine. In: XIV. Bürgel.Zons . Volume 2, 1857, pp. [358] 342. Online version
122. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, p. 195.
123. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, p. 196.
124. ^ W. John: Annals of the historical association for the Lower Rhine. Issue 48, 1889, p. [20] 10. Online version
125. ↑ Marc Föster: The old customs am Rhein. , FRJ 02/2013, p. 185. Online version
126. ↑ ^{a b} Lacomblet, Theodor Joseph, in: Document book for the history of the Lower Rhine or the Archbishopric of Cologne, document no. 937. Volume 2, 1846, p. [592] 554. Digitized edition ULB Bonn
127. ↑ Lacomblet, Theodor Joseph: Document book for the history of the Lower Rhine or the Archbishopric of Cologne, Certificate No. 82. Volume 3, 1853, p. [65] 45. Digitized edition ULB Bonn
128. ↑ Lacomblet, Theodor Joseph: Document book for the history of the Lower Rhine and the Archbishopric of Cöln, document 423. Volume 3, 1853, p. [356] 336. Online edition 2009 nbn-resolving.de
129. ↑ Lacomblet, Theodor Joseph: Document book for the history of the Lower Rhine and the Archbishopric of Cöln, Document 90, Volume 4, 1858, P. [122] 96. Online edition 2009 nbn-resolving.de
130. ^ Lacomblet, Theodor Joseph: Archive for the history of the Lower Rhine , In: The Lehnhöfe am Niederrhein . IV. Volume, 1863, Düsseldorf, p. [410] 398. Online version
131. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin 1997, p. 257.
132. ^ Theodor Joseph Lacomblet, in: Document book for the history of the Lower Rhine and the Archbishopric of Cöln, Document 426 , Volume 1, 1840 p. [312] 296. Online edition 2009 nbn-resolving.de
133. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, pp. 258/9.
134. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, p. 261.
135. ^ Theodor Joseph Lacomblet. In: Document book for the history of the Lower Rhine and the Archbishopric of Cöln, document 628 . 1853, Volume 3, pp. [542] 530. Online edition
136. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, p. 262.
137. ↑ Lacomblet, Theodor Joseph: Document book for the history of the Lower Rhine and the Archbishopric of Cöln, document 433. Volume 4, 1858, p. [565] 539. Online edition 2009 nbn-resolving.de
138. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, p. 683.
139. ^ Theodor Joseph Lacomblet, in: Document book for the history of the Lower Rhine or the Archbishopric of Cöln, 1401–1609, document 554 . Volume 4, 1858, pp. [721] 695. Online version
140. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, p. 317.
141. ↑ Helene Glagla. In: Gerhard VII von Jülich . LVR / Rhenish history
142. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, p. 182.
143. ↑ Lacomblet, Theodor Joseph, in: Document book for the history of the Lower Rhine or the Archbishopric of Cologne, certificate no. 187. Volume 3, 1853, p. [176] 156. Digitized edition ULB Bonn
144. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, p. 329.
145. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin 1997, p. 228.
146. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, p. 233.
147. ↑ Lacomblet, Theodor Joseph, in: Document book for the history of the Lower Rhine or the Archbishopric of Cologne, Certificate No. 738. Volume 2, 1846, p. [473] 435. Digitized edition ULB Bonn
148. ↑ Academic contributions to gülisch and Berg, Volume 3, 1781, in: Certificate CCLIII. S. [482] 263.
149. ↑ Theodor Joseph Lacomblet, in: Document book for the history of the Lower Rhine or the Archbishopric of Cöln, Certificate 199. Volume 3, 1853, 1301–1400, p. [189] 169. Online version
150. ^ Theodor Joseph Lacomblet, in: Document book for the history of the Lower Rhine or the Archbishopric of Cöln, document 412. Volume 3, 1853, 1301–1400, p. [344] 334. Online version
151. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages . Berlin, 1997, p. 233.
152. ↑ Albrecht Brendler: In: The development of the Bergisches Amt Angermund. University of Bonn, Rheinische Vierteljahrsblätter. Jhg. 63, 1999, p. [160] 146.
153. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, p. 320.
154. ^ Ottomar Moeller: The building history of the city of Düsseldorf . In: Geschichtsverein Düsseldorf (Hrsg.): History of the city of Düsseldorf. Festschrift for the 600th anniversary . Düsseldorf 1888, p. 355 ( digitized version )
155. ^ Theodor Joseph Lacomblet, in: Document book for the history of the Lower Rhine or the Archbishopric of Cöln, Certificate 857. Volume 3, 1853, 1301–1400, p. [758] 746. Online version
156. ^ Hermanns, Aloys: History of Benrath and surroundings . In: Section: 4. The first lock . Düsseldorf, 1889, p. [19] 11. Online version
157. ^ Theodor Joseph Lacomblet, in: Document book for the history of the Lower Rhine or the Archbishopric of Cöln, Document 849. Volume 3, 1853, 1301–1400, p. [756] 744. Online version
158. ↑ Otto Reinhard Redlich:  Wilhelm I, Duke of Berg . In: Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie (ADB). Volume 42, Duncker & Humblot, Leipzig 1897, pp. 723-727.
159. ^ Theodor Joseph Lacomblet, in: Document book for the history of the Lower Rhine or the Archbishopric of Cöln, document 901. Volume 3, 1853, 1301–1400, p. [804] 792. Online version
160. ^ Theodor Joseph Lacomblet, in: Document book for the history of the Lower Rhine or the Archbishopric of Cöln, Certificate 63. Volume 4, 1858, 1401–1609, p. [94] 68. Online version
161. ↑ Strauven, Karl Leopold, in: History of the Palace of Düsseldorf. 1872, p. [31] 27. Online version
162. ^ Pfeiffer, Friedrich: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Akademieverlag, Berlin, 1996, pp. 304 to 305. ISBN 3-05-003177-8 .
163. ↑ Lacomblet, Theodor Joseph: Document book for the history of the Lower Rhine and the Archbishopric of Cöln, document 433 + notes on the document. Volume 4, 1858, pp. [565] 539. Online edition 2009 nbn-resolving.de
164. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, p. 212.
165. ↑ Lacomblet, Theodor Joseph: Document book for the history of the Lower Rhine or the Archbishopric of Cologne, document no. 639. Volume 3, 1853, p. [550] 538. Digitized edition ULB Bonn
166. ^ Tucking, Karl, in: History of the City of Neuss. 1891, p. [202] 177. Online version
167. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, p. 659.
168. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, pp. 659 + 660.
169. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, pp. 661 + 662.
170. ↑ Scholten, Robert: Contribution to the history of Wissel and Grieth. 1889, p. [134] 128. Online version
171. ↑ Schueren, Gert van der: Clevische Chronik. 1884, p. [246] 204. Online version
172. ^ Pfeiffer, Friedrich: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Akademieverlag, Berlin, 1996, pp. 294 to 296, ISBN 3-05-003177-8 .
173. ^ Theodor Joseph Lacomblet: Document book for the history of the Lower Rhine and the Archbishopric of Cöln, certificate 305. Volume 3, 1853, 1301–1400, p. [267] 247.
174. ↑ Scholten, Robert: Contribution to the history of Wissel and Grieth. 1889, pp. [133 + 134] 127 + 128. Online version
175. ^ Pfeiffer, Friedrich: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Akademieverlag, Berlin, 1996, p. 321, ISBN 3-05-003177-8 .
176. ^ Theodor Joseph Lacomblet: Document book for the history of the Lower Rhine and the Archbishopric of Cöln, document 691 . Volume 3, 1853, 1301-1400, pp. [601] 593.
177. ^ Pfeiffer, Friedrich: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Akademieverlag, Berlin, 1996, p. 322, ISBN 3-05-003177-8 .
178. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, p. 237.
179. ↑ Lacomblet, Theodor Joseph: Document book for the history of the Lower Rhine or the Archbishopric of Cologne, Certificate No. 268. Volume 2, 1846, p. [176] 138. Digitized edition ULB Bonn
180. ^ Pfeiffer, Friedrich: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Akademieverlag, Berlin, 1996, p. 293, ISBN 3-05-003177-8 .
181. ^ Pfeiffer, Friedrich: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Akademieverlag, Berlin, 1996, p. 294, ISBN 3-05-003177-8 .
182. ↑ Lacomblet, Theodor Joseph: Document book for the history of the Lower Rhine and the Archbishopric of Cöln, document 447. Volume 3, 1853, p. [380] 360. Online edition 2009 nbn-resolving.de
183. ^ Pfeiffer, Friedrich: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Akademieverlag, Berlin, 1996, p. 295, ISBN 3-05-003177-8 .
184. ^ Schwann, Mathieu: History of the Cologne Chamber of Commerce. 1906, p. [159] 126. Online version
185. ↑ Scholten, Robert: On the history of the city of Kleve. Kleve 1905, p. [56] 30. Online version
186. ^ Pfeiffer, Friedrich: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Akademieverlag, Berlin, 1996, p. 253, ISBN 3-05-003177-8 .
187. ^ Theodor Joseph Lacomblet: Document book for the history of the Lower Rhine and the Archbishopric of Cöln, Certificate 709. Volume 3, 1853, 1301–1400, p. [619] 607.
188. ↑ H. v. Eicken: On the history of the city of Ruhrort / magazine of the Bergisches Geschichtsverein. Book No. 17, 1882, p. 2. Online version
189. ^ Theodor Joseph Lacomblet: Document book for the history of the Lower Rhine and the Archbishopric of Cöln, Document 721 , Volume 3, 1853, 1301–1400, 1853 p. [628] 616.
190. ↑ ^{a b c} H. v. Eicken: On the history of the city of Ruhrort. In: Journal of the Bergisches Geschichtsverein. Book No. 17, 1882, p. 3. Online version
191. ↑ H. v. Eicken. On the history of the city of Ruhrort. In: Journal of the Bergisches Geschichtsverein. Book No. 17, 1882, p. 4. Online version
192. ↑ H. v. Eicken. On the history of the city of Ruhrort. In: Journal of the Bergisches Geschichtsverein. Book No. 17, 1882, p. 5. Online version
193. ↑ Scholten, Robert: On the history of the city of Kleve. Kleve, 1905, p. [58] 32. Online version
194. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, p. 657.
195. ^ Scholten, Robert, in: Die Stadt Kleve. 1879, p. [30] 22. Online version
196. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, p. 274.
197. ↑ Lacomblet, Theodor Joseph, in: Document book for the history of the Lower Rhine or the Archbishopric of Cologne, Certificate No. 99 , Volume 2, 1846, p. [92] 54. Digitized edition ULB Bonn
198. ↑ Lacomblet, Theodor Joseph, in: Document book for the history of the Lower Rhine or the Archbishopric of Cologne, Certificate No. 118 , Volume 2, 1846, p. [102] 64. Digitized edition ULB Bonn
199. ↑ Lacomblet, Theodor Joseph, in: Document book for the history of the Lower Rhine or the Archbishopric of Cologne, certificate no. 167. Volume 2, 1846, p. [124] 86. Digitized edition ULB Bonn
200. ↑ Lacomblet, Theodor Joseph, in: Document book for the history of the Lower Rhine or the Archbishopric of Cologne, Certificate No. 317. Volume 2, 1846, p. [203] 165. Digitized edition ULB Bonn
201. ↑ Christoph Jacob Kremer. In: Academic contributions to Gülchberg history . Under: Section documents, document LXXX from the 26th Christian month (December) 1249 . 1781, Mannheim, ed. A. Lamey, p. [321] 102. Online version
202. ^ Theodor Joseph Lacomblet. In: Document book for the history of the Lower Rhine and the Archbishopric of Cöln, documents 532 + 543 . 1853, Volume 3, pp. [452] 432 + [461] 449. Online edition
203. ^ Yearbook of the Düsseldorf History Association. In: French mediation policy on the Lower Rhine . 1897, Volume 11, p. [202] 200. Online version
204. ↑ Lacomblet, Theodor Joseph: Document book for the history of the Lower Rhine and the Archbishopric of Cöln, documents 524 + 539 . Volume 1, 1840, pp. [381] 365 + [392] 376.
205. ↑ Lacomblet, Theodor Joseph, in: Document book for the history of the Lower Rhine or the Archbishopric of Cologne, certificate no. 2. Volume 3, 1853, p. [22] 2. Digitized edition ULB Bonn
206. ↑ W. John, in: Annals of the Historical Association for the Lower Rhine. Issue 48, 1889, p. [19] -. Online version
207. ↑ Lacomblet, Theodor Joseph: Archive for the history of the Lower Rhine , In: Düsseldorf with a constant view of the country's history, second section . IV. Volume, 1863, Düsseldorf, p. [304] 292. Online version
208. ↑ ^{a b} W. John, in: Annals of the Historical Association for the Lower Rhine. Issue 48, 1889, p. [20] 10. Online version
209. ↑ W. John, in: Annals of the Historical Association for the Lower Rhine. Issue 48, 1889, p. [23] 13. Online version
210. ↑ W. John, in: Annals of the Historical Association for the Lower Rhine. Issue 48, 1889, p. [24] 14. Online version
211. ↑ ^{a b} W. John, in: Annals of the Historical Association for the Lower Rhine. Issue 48, 1889, p. [25] 15. Online version
212. ↑ Lacomblet, Theodor Joseph, in: Document book for the history of the Lower Rhine or the Archbishopric of Cologne, certificate no. 449 . Volume 4, 1858, pp. [581] 555. Digitized edition ULB Bonn
213. ↑ Koller, Heinrich, in: Regesten Kaiser Friedrichs III. (1440-1493), certificate 30 , image no. 40th MDZ
214. ↑ W. John, in: Annals of the Historical Association for the Lower Rhine. Issue 48, 1889, p. [26] 16. Online version
215. ↑ W. John, in: Annals of the Historical Association for the Lower Rhine. Issue 48, 1889, p. [27] 17. Online version
216. ↑ W. John, in: Annals of the Historical Association for the Lower Rhine. Issue 48, 1889, p. [28] 18. Online version
217. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, p. 497.
218. ↑ Breysig, Kurt and Wolters, Friedrich. In: History of Brandenburg's finances from 1640 to 1697 . 1895, Leipzig, p. [479] 441. Online version
219. ^ In: Official Gazette for the Düsseldorf administrative region . No. 87, Jg. 1828, p. [641] 614. Online version
220. ^ In: Official Gazette for the Düsseldorf administrative region . No. 70, Jg. 1829, p. [518] 494. Online version
221. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, p. 271/2.
222. ↑ Lacomblet, Theodor Joseph: Document book for the history of the Lower Rhine or the Archbishopric of Cologne, Certificate No. 636 . Volume 2, 1846, p. [421] 373. Digitized edition ULB Bonn
223. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, p. 407.
224. ↑ Lacomblet, Theodor Joseph, in: Document book for the history of the Lower Rhine or the Archbishopric of Cologne, certificate no. 994. Volume 2, 1846, p. [624] 586. Digitized edition ULB Bonn
225. ↑ Lacomblet, Theodor Joseph: Archive for the history of the Lower Rhine , In: Düsseldorf with a constant view of the country's history, second section . IV. Volume, 1863, Düsseldorf, p. [29] 19. Online version
226. ↑ Lacomblet, Theodor Joseph: Document book for the history of the Lower Rhine or the Archbishopric of Cologne, certificate no. 501. Volume 3, 1853, p. [449] 429. Digitized edition ULB Bonn
227. ^ Theodor Joseph Lacomblet: Document book for the history of the Lower Rhine and the Archbishopric of Cöln, document 684 . Part 3, 1853, 1301-1400, pp. [595] 583.
228. ↑ Aus'm Weerth, Ernst, in: Kunstdenkmäler des Christian Abendlandes. 1857, p. [45] 43. Online version
229. ^ Föhl, Walter, in: Uerdinger Bibliographie / III. History. 1955, p. 90. Online version
230. ↑ Schultes, Johann A. von, in Diplomatic History of the Count's House of Henneberg. Volume 1, 1788, p. [169] 117. Online version
231. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, p. 300.
232. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, p. 298/9.
233. ^ Family table of Diether III. von Katzenelnbogen , as of May 2, 2008
234. ↑ ^{a b} Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, p. 286.
235. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, pp. 667 + 681.
236. ↑ Koller, Heinrich, in: Regesten Kaiser Friedrichs III. (1440-1493), certificate 184. Image no. 114. MDZ
237. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, pp. 265-268.
238. ↑ Boisserée, in: Annals of the Historical Association for the Lower Rhine, in particular the old ore diocese of Cologne. 1855, Cologne, p. [53] 49. Online version
239. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, p. 268.
240. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, p. 306.
241. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, pp. 278-280.
242. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, p. 207.
243. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, pp. 230, 232 and 236f.
244. ^ LVR: Castles on the Middle Rhine.
245. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, pp. 239 + 241.
246. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, p. 242.
247. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, pp. 212/213.
248. ↑ Lacomblet, Theodor Joseph: Document book for the history of the Lower Rhine or the Archbishopric of Cologne, document no. 886. Volume 3, 1853, p. [793] 781. Digitized edition ULB Bonn
249. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, p. 213.
250. ^ Völcker, in: Association for history and antiquity, Frankfurt a / M , 1889, p. [202] 166. Online version
251. ^ Völcker, in: Association for history and antiquity, Frankfurt a / M. 1889, p. [204] 168. Online version
252. ↑ ^{a b c} Ockhart, Joseph Franz, in: Historical representation of the early and later legislation on customs and merchant shipping on the Rhine . 1818, p. [226] 208. Online version
253. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, p. 26.
254. ^ Society for older German history. In: The documents of the German kings and emperors . In: Certificate 84 . 1879, Hanover, first volume, p. 165.
255. ^ Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle in the Middle Ages. Berlin, 1997, pp. 382 + 685.
256. ↑ Ockhart, Joseph Franz, in: Historical background of the earlier and later legislation on tariffs and commercial navigation of the Rhine. 1818, p. [225] 207. Online version
257. ↑ Monumenta Zollerana, in: Documents of the Franconian line of the House of Hohenzollern. Volume 2, 1856, Berlin, p. [267] 233. Digitized
258. ↑ Ockhart, Joseph Franz, in: Historical background of the earlier and later legislation on tariffs and commercial navigation of the Rhine. 1818, p. [230] 212. Online version
259. ↑ Meyer, in: Official collection of the older federal farewells. 1839, p. [924] 896. Online version
260. ^ Schwann, Mathieu, in: History of the Cologne Chamber of Commerce. 1906, pp. [102 + 103] 74 + 75. Online version
261. ^ Schwann, Mathieu, in: History of the Cologne Chamber of Commerce. 1906, p. [236] 202. Online version
262. ^ Schwann, Mathieu, in: History of the Cologne Chamber of Commerce. 1906, p. [261] 226. Online version
263. ^ Schwann, Mathieu, in: History of the Cologne Chamber of Commerce. 1906, p. [290] 254. Online version
264. ↑ ^{a b c d} Schwann, Mathieu, in: History of the Cologne Chamber of Commerce. 1906, p. [428] 386. Online version
265. ^ Schwann, Mathieu, in: History of the Cologne Chamber of Commerce. 1906, p. [319] 283. Online version
266. ^ Schwann, Mathieu, in: History of the Cologne Chamber of Commerce. 1906, p. [316] 280. Online version
267. ^ Schwann, Mathieu, in: History of the Cologne Chamber of Commerce. 1906, p. [397] 357. Online version
268. ^ Schwann, Mathieu, in: History of the Cologne Chamber of Commerce. 1906, p. [413] 373. Online version

Remarks

1. ↑ The assumption that the Rhine toll was originally a "fee" is no longer accepted by current historians for the most part. (Proof: F. Pfeiffer, p. 669)
2. ↑ At the time of the Cologne customs in 1480, the transport volume for cured herring and wine was particularly high. For example, the Count Palatine purchased 80 tons of herrings.
3. ↑ The information for customs from the High Middle Ages comes largely from the traditions of the “Koblenz customs and tariffs” in the Middle Ages. Written documents provide an insight into the "oldest tariff of around 1000" and its revisions from 1195, 1209 and around 1300, for the customary practice at this customs post on the Rhine. (Evidence: Friedrich Pfeiffer: Rheinische Transitzölle im Mittelalter. )
4. ↑ Payment was made in "light pound denarii" or "Mark Cologne denarii". This corresponded to either 240 easy to 144 or also to 160 Cologne pfennigs, i.e. a value ratio of 5: 3 or 3: 2. (Proof: F. Pfeiffer, p. 121)
5. ↑ For comparison: A Cologne Fuder had a volume of six ohms á 145.6 liters. (Proof: F. Pfeifer, p. 176)
6. ↑ The abolition requirement for the Rhine tariffs also affected those of the various counts' customs owners. These were not confirmed by the king, but their repeal was only enforced in a few cases. (Proof: F. Pfeiffer / Chapter: The Customs War of 1301/1302)
7. ↑ According to F. Pfeiffers in his book on the transit tariffs on the Rhine, from the evidence at the beginning of the Middle Ages, it is often disputed whether transfer tariffs or local tariffs were cited. Locally levied tariffs were the goods tariffs, market tariffs (also market-related shipping tariffs!) And bridge tariffs. It was not until around the 12th century that the name became clearer in the old documents.
8. ↑ In the text of the cited document for the customs exemption of Kamp monastery, R. Pick also suspects that Rheinberg was originally under the king's control and was originally a customs post of the empire.
9. ↑ This Adolf III. by Mark was until 1364 Elect been in Cologne. However, he then renounced the office of archbishop in order to be able to become Count of Kleve in 1368.
10. ↑ Often the reason given for the relocation is that the Rhine had shifted its main stream to the east. The relocation to Zons despite the relocation of the Rhine was not the main reason. As early as 1355, the Archbishop Konrad von Hochstaden allowed the Neuss residents to move the customs registration east to an island in the Rhine. Because of the existing tensions, Archbishop Friedrich von Saar Werden wanted to gain greater access to the customs post by relocating. (Proof: Friedrich Pfeiffer, p. 250)
11. ↑ In older sources such as Düsseldorfer Geschichtsverein; In: Festschrift for the 600th anniversary. 1888, p. [371] 362 the year 1373 is given instead of 1377. The German kings / emperors in the 14th century made several decisions for or against the relocation of customs. For example, document 806 from 1371: Emperor Karl VI. permits relocation upon revocation. Document 833 from 1379: King Wenzel abolishes all customs duties imposed by Emperor Charles IV between Rees and Andernach - especially with reference to Düsseldorf. Document 849 from 1380: King Wenzel permits the customs to be moved over 6 Turnosen from Kaiserwert to Düsseldorf. All documents according to Lacomblet, 1853, part 3.
12. ↑ Since the estates in the Duchy of Geldern were not ready to recognize the Jülich-Berger as sovereign, this additional Rhine toll was allowed as a “punitive tariff” until Adolf von Jülich-Berg was recognized as the new Duke by the Kaiser. More on this under Second War of the Geldr Succession
13. ↑ The confirmation given in document no. 268 between Count Dietrich von Kleve and Count Otto von Geldern concerned the decree of the Rhine tariff in 1242 for the Geldener at the customs post in Orsoy (evidence: Lacomblet, Harleß in “Archiv / Anales monasterii s. Pantaleonis 1238 –1249 “, second volume, p. [222] 218.).
14. ↑ Up the Rhine, Koblenz was the last Prussian customs station, since from there no area on the right bank of the Rhine belonged to Prussia.
15. ↑ For the first pledge of Kaiserswerth with the Rhine toll to Kurköln, Lacomblet gives both 1292 (1863, Volume IV “Archive for the History of the Lower Rhine”, p. 147) and 1293 (1846, Volume 2 “Document Book for the History of the Lower Rhine” or of the Archbishopric of Cologne, Certificate No. 937 ”). Since the certificate states May 28, 1293 as the date of issue, the date 1292 in volume 4 / archive is a misprint.
16. ↑ In 1298 Johann IV. Burgrave of Rheineck was the pledge of the imperial castle with the place Kaiserswerth . The castle was occupied by its vassals Knight Ludwig, called Perdous, and Tilman von Vritzdorf. The burgrave refused to evacuate even at the request of King Kaiserswerth. Only after the Archbishop of Mainz had captured the Burgrave, the order was issued to Tilman von Vritzdorf to hand over Kaiserswerth to the Archbishop. This then happened. (Proof: as above + p. [30] 30.)
17. ↑ Count Dieter V. had unduly increased the customs duty for Rheinfels and was thus one of the customs lords that the League of Cities fought against. In the Worms annals, the reason for the warlike actions was given as “violation of the peace against the Mainz people”.
18. ↑ The Geisenheim customs office was one of the customs offices whose tariffs had remained at the reduced tariff level at least since the peace treaty of 1317. This indicated a pledge of 1342 when the pledge amount for the year was only £ 200 Heller. (Proof: F. Pfeiffer, Rheinische Transitzölle, p. 267)
19. ↑ In many texts at the beginning of the High Middle Ages it is not clear from the texts whether they are market taxes or transit duties. Only in the case of transit tariffs that were levied in places on the Rhine are likely to refer to Rhine tariffs, even if the word "Rhine tariff" was not used. (Proof: F. Pfeiffer et al. P. 278/9)